LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 
IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


BY 

HERMAN  G.  JAMES,  J.D.,  PhD. 

PROFESSOR    OF    GOVERNMENT    IN    THE    UNIVERSITY    OF    TEXAS;  AUTHOR    OF 

"APPLIED    CITY    GOVERNMENT,"     "a    HANDBOOK   OF    CIVIC 

IMPROVEMENT,"    "MUNICIPAL   FUNCTIONS,"    ETC. 


D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK  LONDON 

1921 


COPYRIGHT,   1921,   BY 

D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY 


PRINTED   IN    THE    UNITED    8TATE8    OF   AMERICA 


• 


TO 
MY  FATHER 

EDMUND  J.  JAMES 


PREFACE 

The  attention  of  students  of  government  has  been  re- 
peatedly called  to  the  fundamental  importance  of  what 
is  known  as  local  government.  Not  only  does  this  rep- 
resent the  aspect  of  government  with  which  the  average 
citizen  is  in  the  most  continuous  and  conscious  contact 
in  the  activities  of  his  everyday  life,  but  it  is  also,  as 
has  frequently  been  pointed  out,  that  phase  of  government 
which  is  the  least  subject  to  rapid  change.  The  familiar 
example  of  France,  where  many  of  the  fundamental  char- 
acteristics of  the  system  of  local  government  outlasted  re- 
peated revolutionary  changes  in  the  national  government, 
serves  as  a  common  illustration  of  this  fact. 

It  is  somewhat  surprising,  therefore,  in  view  of  the 
acknowledged  importance  of  the  study  of  local  govern- 
ment, that  this  field  has  been  so  generally  neglected  in  the 
United  States.  One  phase  of  local  government,  namely, 
the  government  of  cities,  has,  it  is  true,  received  in  the 
last  twenty-five  years  very  general  attention  from  inves- 
tigators, writers,  and  the  general  public.  But  the  govern- 
ment of  the  county  and  its  rural  subdivisions  has  been 
all  but  ignored  in  this  country. 

Furthermore,  one  very  important  consideration  in  the 
study  of  local  government  in  the  United  States  has  been 
quite  overlooked  in  the  literature  of  the  subject  —  that 
consideration  is  the  essential  unity  of  the  problem.  City 
government  is  simply  one  aspect  of  local  government,  and 
it  cannot  be  studied  advantageously  as  an  isolated  phenom- 
enon.    It  is  as  closely  bound  up  in  one  way  with  the 


viii  PREFACE 

problems  of  county  government  as  it  is  in  another  with 
the  problems  of  general  state  government.  So  also  with 
the  county,  whose  problems  cannot  be  understood  with- 
out reference  to  the  government  of  the  subdivisions,  urban 
as  well  as  rural,  that  lie  within  it.  Local  government 
in  this  country  as  a  closely  coordinated  whole  has  not 
as  yet  received  due  attention.  It  is  the  purpose  of  this 
volume  to  supply  that  lack. 

The  general  reader  will  find  here  the  entire  field  of  local 
government  presented  to  him  as  a  connected  whole.  The 
college  teacher  who  views  the  subject  of  local  government 
as  a  logical  whole  will  find  herein  a  comprehensive  text 
for  a  course  based  on  that  conception.  General  reader 
and  college  student  alike  will  find  it  easy,  by  the  aid  of 
the  general  and  special  references  indicated  in  each  chap- 
ter, to  supplement  this  general  survey  with  intensive  study 
of  particular  phases  of  the  subject. 

Recognition  is  accorded  in  this  work  to  the  funda- 
mental importance  of  a  comparative  point  of  view  by  de- 
voting the  first  chapter  to  a  brief  survey  of  the  systems  of 
local  government  in  England  and  France.  The  treatment 
is  necessarily  sketchy,  but  it  is  hoped  that  it  will  suffice 
to  give  the  busy  reader  at  least  a  background  for  view- 
ing our  own  system  in  a  comparative  light.  For  the 
reader  or  student  with  time  and  inclination  to  enter  more 
minutely  into  the  matters  treated  in  the  introductory  chap- 
ter ample  references  are  given. 

The  greatest  difficulty  encountered  in  treating  the  sub- 
ject of  local  government  in  the  United  States  is,  of  course, 
that  of  describing  in  general  terms  a  subject  that  presents 
almost  infinite  variations.  There  are  forty-eight  separate 
jurisdictions  governing  the  organization  and  operation  of 
local  government,  and  within  the  states  themselves  local 
variations  are  so  great  as  almost  to  defy  general  descrip- 


PREFACE  ix 

tion.  Nevertheless,  it  is  believed  that  by  emphasizing 
similarities,  especially  in  tendencies,  and  by  pointing  out 
the  most  significant  and  important  of  the  countless  varia- 
tions, a  composite  picture  may  result  that  will  not  be  with- 
out value.  It  is  inevitable,  however,  that  under  these 
conditions,  especially  in  view  of  the  continual  modifica- 
tions that  are  occurring  from  year  to  year,  errors  of  fact 
may  creep  in,  despite  all  the  care  that  may  be  exercised. 
For  such  as  may  be  found  the  author  craves  indulgence 
and  requests  aid  in  their  rectification. 

The  author  gratefully  acknowledges  valued  aid  received 
from  Professor  John  A.  Fairlie,  not  only  indirectly 
through  his  pioneer  work  in  the  field  of  rural  local  gov- 
ernment, Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns,  and  Vil- 
lages, but  also  directly  through  suggestions  as  to  the  ar- 
rangement of  material  in  the  present  volume.  He  is  also 
indebted  to  Sarah  S.  Edwards  of  the  Bureau  of  Govern- 
ment Research  of  the  University  of  Texas  for  the  prepa- 
ration of  the  Index  and  for  assistance  in  reading  the 
proofs. 

Herman  G.  James. 


CONTENTS 


PAOl 

Preface vii 

CHAPTER 

I.  Local  Government  in  England  and  France I 

What   Is   Local    Government? I 

Local   Government  in  England 4 

The  Origin  of  Local  Government  in  England     ...  4 

The  Development  of  Local  Government  in  England     .  6 

Present  Characteristics  of  English  Local  Government  .  14 

The   County 14 

County  Subdivisions 19 

Urban  Parishes  and  Poor-Law  Unions      ....  19 

Rural   Parishes 20 

County    Districts 21 

Boroughs 25 

Central  Administrative  Control 29 

Summary  of  English  Local  Government 35 

Local  Government  in  France 37 

The  Origin  and  Development  of  Local  Government  .     .  37 

Present  Characteristics  of  French  Local  Government     .  44 

The  Department 44 

The  Arrondissements        51 

The  Cantons 52 

The  Communes 52 

Special  Local  Corporations 59 

Central  Administrative  Departments 59 

Proposals  for  Reform 60 

Conclusions  on  French  and  English  Local  Government    .  62 

II.  Origin  and  Development  of  Local,  Government  in  the 

United  States 66 

Local  Government  in  the  Colonies 66 

Early  Colonial  Forms  of  Local  Government  ....  66 

Local  Government  in  the  Massachusetts  Colony    .     .  72 

Local  Government  in  the  Virginia  Colony    ....  76 

Local  Government  in  the  Middle  Colonies    ....  82 

Local  Government  from  Revolutionary  Times  to   1800     .  90 

Local  Government  from  1800   to    1850 95 

Local  Government  in  the  Old  States 95 

Local  Government  in  the  New  States 98 

Local  Government  in  the  New  Territories       ....  107 
Summary  of  Local  Government  in  the  United  States  to 

1850 109 


xii  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAO» 

Local  Government  from  1850  to  1900 in 

Developments  in  Local  Government  since  1900  .     .     .     .116 

III.  The  Organization  of  County  Government    .     .     .     .120 

Physical  Characteristics  of  American  Counties  ....  120 

The  Creation  and  Abolition  of  Counties 124 

General  Features  of  County  Administration 127 

The  County  Board 130 

Types  of  County  Boards 13° 

The  Powers  of  the  County  Board 134 

Judicial   Officers 130 

The  County  Judge 139 

The  Clerk  of  Court        142 

The  County  Attorney 144 

The  Sheriff 151 

The  Coroner *57 

Justices  of  the  Peace 160 

County  Finance  Officers 161 

The  County  Assessor 161 

Tax  Collectors  and  Treasurers 165 

The  County  Auditor 168 

Clerical  Officers  of  the  County 170 

The  County  Clerks 170 

The  Recorder  or  Register  of   Deeds 171 

The  County  Surveyor 173 

County  Education,  Health,  and  Poor  Relief  Officers  .     .  174 

County  School  Authorities 174 

County  Health  Authorities 178 

County  Poor  Officers »I 

Miscellaneous  County  Officers 188 

County  Employees *82 

Summary  of  County  Organization 184 

IV.  The  Functions  of  County  Government 186 

The  Legal  Nature  and  Position  of  the  County  .     .     .     .186 

County  Functions  in  General 194 

Functions  of  State  Administration 197 

Judicial   Administration 197 

The  County  Jail 200 

County  Functions  in  State  Elections 201 

Assessment  and  Collection  of  State  Taxes     ....  203 

Military   Administration 204 

The  Recording  of  Deeds  and  Other  Instruments     .     .  205 

Functions  of  Local  Administration 207 

Education 209 

Libraries 214 

Highways 217 

Charities,  Hospitals,  and  Corrections 220 

Sanitation  and  the  Conservation  of  Health     ....  225 

Recreation 228 

Public-Service   Enterprises 230 


CONTENTS  xiii 

OHAPTM  „  ™* 

Miscellaneous   Expenses 232 

County  Finances 232 

County   Revenues 233 

Revenue  Receipts 233 

General   Property  Taxes 234 

Earnings  of  General  Departments 237 

Subventions  and  Grants 237 

Special  Assessments 239 

Liquor  Licenses  and  Other  Imposts 240 

Poll  and  Occupation  Taxes 241 

Interest  and  Rents 241 

Fines,  Forfeits,  and  Escheats 242 

Miscellaneous    Revenue   Receipts 242 

Non-Revenue  Receipts 243 

Budgets  and   Accounting 248 

Summary  of  Functions  of  County  Government  .     .     .     .251 

V.  The  Subdivisions  of  the  County 254 

The  New  England  Town 255 

The  Town  Meeting 258 

Town  Officers 2°2 

The  Selectmen    .    j 203 

The  Town  Clerk 2°4 

The  Town  Treasurer        264 

The  Town  Constable        ^S 

School  Authorities 265 

Miscellaneous  Officers  and  Boards 200 

Central  and  Middle  Western  Townships 268 

The  Town  Meeting 274 

Township  Officers 277 

Township  Functions        ■     •     •  27° 

County  Divisions  in  the  Southern  and  Western  States     .  284 

County  Subdivisions  in  the  South 284 

County  Subdivisions  in  the  West 288 

Semi-Urban  Subdivisions  of  Counties  .     .     .  _  .     .     .     -290 
Summary  and  Conclusions  as  to  County  Divisions  .     .     .297 

VI.  The  Organization  of  City  Government 300 

General  Characteristics  of  the  City 3°o 

The   Basis  of   City  Organization 304 

Special  Charter  System 3©4 

General  Charter  System 305 

Classified  Charter  System 3°7 

Home-Rule   Charter   System 3<» 

Optional   Charter   System 310 

The  Popular  Basis  of  City  Government 3" 

Powers  of  the  Electorate 3H 

The   Preferential   Ballot  and   Proportional   Representa- 
tion     3I4 

The  Initiative  and   Referendum 3*9 

Main  Types  of  City  Organization 3-i 


xiv  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

Types  of  City  Governments 321 

The  Mayor-and-Council  Plan 323 

The  Mayor 324 

The  Council        330 

The  Administrative  Departments 336 

Commission  Government 341 

The  City-Manager   Plan 347 

Municipal  Courts 352 

The  Development   of   Municipal   Courts 353 

The  Present  Form  of  Municipal  Courts 354 

VII.  The  Functions  of  City  Government 358 

The  Legal  Nature  and  Position  of  the  City 358 

The  Powers  of  the  City     .     .     .     .  _ 358 

Legislative  Control   Over  Municipalities 361 

The  Liability  of  Cities 365 

Municipal   Functions  in  General 370 

The  Development  of  Municipal  Functions 370 

Public  Safety 375 

The  Police  Department 375 

The  Fire  Department 381 

Public  Health 383 

The  Food  Supply 384 

Waste    Disposal 387 

The  Housing  Problem 388 

Instruction  in  Public  Health 388 

Public   Education 39* 

Types  of  School  Administrations 392 

The  Scope  of  Public  Education 396 

Public   Libraries 397 

Social   Welfare 399 

Poor  Relief 399 

Public  Recreation 401 

Public   Works 402 

Highway  Maintenance 403 

The  Public  Water  Supply § .     .  405 

Sewerage  System 407 

Public   Utilities 408 

Privately  Owned  Municipal  Utilities 409 

Municipal  Ownership  of   Public  Utilities     .     .     .     .411 

City    Planning 412 

Municipal    Finances 414 

Sources  of  Municipal  Revenue    . 414 

The  Borrowing  Power  of  Municipalities 420 

Municipal  Accounting  Methods 422 

The  Relation  of  Cities  to  Counties 422 

VIII.  Developments  and  Tendencies  of  the  Past  Decade    .  425 
New  Developments  in  County  Government 426 

Home  Rule 426 

State  Control ,  .  434 


CONTENTS  xv 

CHAPTER  PAGH 

New  Activities 436 

County  and  City  Consolidation 437 

Agencies  for  the  Study  and  Reform  of  County  Govern- 
ment         449 

City  Government 452 

Home  Rule 452 

Charter  Reform 453 

New   Activities 459 

Municipal   Reform  Agencies 459' 

IX.    Conclusion 461 

The  City ,     .  462 

The  County 465 

Index 475 


LOCAL    GOVERNMENT 
IN  THE  UNITED   STATES 

CHAPTER  I 
LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  IN  ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE 

What  Is  Local  Government? — At  the  outset  of  a  de- 
scriptive and  critical  discussion,  such  as  this,  it  is  well 
to  come  to  some  understanding  as  to  the  use  of  terms, 
particularly  when  those  terms  are  employed  in  the  title 
of  the  work  and  are  actually  subject  to  varying  uses 
in  the  literature  of  the  subject.  This  being  the  case  with 
the  term  "  local  government "  herein  employed,  the  first 
matter  for  consideration  will  be  the  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion, "What  is  local  government?"  or  rather,  in  order 
not  to  appear  dogmatic  as  to  a  point  that  may  not  be 
capable  of  absolute  determination,  "  What  is  local  gov- 
ernment for  the  purposes  of  this  discussion?" 

We  may  define  local  government  for  the  purposes  of 
this  presentation  as  the  agencies  and  functions  of  gov- 
ernment as  established  for  the  management  of  public  af- 
fairs within  an  area  or  territory  smaller  than  that  of  the 
state.  With  reference  to  a  federal  system  like  that  of 
the  United  States,  this  word  state  will  be  taken  to  refer 
to  the  individual  commonwealths  that  make  up  the  fed- 
eration. When  speaking  of  unitary  governments  like  that 
of  France,  for  instance,  the  term  "  state  government " 
will  be  synonymous  with  central  or  national  govern- 
ment. 


2  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  definition  of  the  term  local 
government  as  set  forth  above  denotes  agencies  of  gov- 
ernment for  localities,  not  necessarily  of  or  by  localities. 
This  distinction  is  important,  because  "  local  govern- 
ment "  has  not  infrequently  been  used  in  this  latter  sense 
and  identified  in  meaning  with  "  local  self-government." 
Now  it  so  happens  that  in  the  United  States  virtually 
all  territorial  subdivisions  of  our  states  which  have  of- 
ficers of  government  witH  a  jurisdiction  corresponding 
to  the  boundaries  of  those  subdivisions  do  enjoy  to 
a  greater  or  less  extent  local  self-government  in  that 
their  officers  are  chosen  either  from  or  by  the  localities, 
or  both,  or  exercise  powers  granted  to  the  localities  as 
such.  But  the  question  not  merely  of  the  proper  extent 
of  such  powers  and  of  the  measure  of  local  participation 
that  should  be  granted,  but  also  of  the  necessity  or  desir- 
ability of  governmental  subdivisions  not  having  any  of 
the  attributes  of  local  self-government,  is  one  that  merits 
careful  consideration.  It  is  obviously  unwise,  therefore, 
to  confuse  the  term  "  local  government  "  with  the  more 
restricted  term  "  local  self-government,"  which  latter  is 
rather  the  expression  of  a  principle  or  political  ideal  than 
the  designation  of  part  or  portion  of  the  existing  govern- 
mental system.  As  will  appear  below,  there  are  in  for- 
eign countries  agencies  of  government  for  lesser  areas 
than  that  of  the  whole  state  which  are  not  of  or  by  the 
localities  but  simply  for  them. 

Having  determined  what  we  mean  by  local  government 
and  before  proceeding  with  the  examination  of  local  gov- 
ernment as  it  is  and  the  discussion  of  local  government 
as  we  think  it  should  be,  the  question  naturally  pres- 
ents itself  at  the  very  outset  of  this  inquiry  "  Why  is 
local  government  ?  "  As  a  mere  matter  of  observation 
it  can  be  determined  that  in  every  country  of  the  civilized 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  3 

world,  from  the  largest  to  the  smallest,  there  is  found  a 
system  of  local  government.  That  is,  in  every  state 
there  are  governmental  subdivisions.  Is  this  merely  a 
coincidence,  can  it  be  explained  on  purely  historical 
grounds,  or  is  there  some  universal  principle  of  govern- 
ment that  demands  subordinate  governmental  units  with- 
in the  state  no  matter  what  its  size  or  history? 

Although  this  question,  as  has  been  said,  obtrudes  it- 
self at  the  very  outset  of  our  discussion,  it  can  obviously 
not  be  answered  satisfactorily  until  —  if  indeed  it  is 
capable  of  satisfactory  answer  as  a  general  question 
of  universal  application  at  all  —  an  examination  of  the 
origin  and  development  as  well  as  of  the  present  status 
and  problems  of  local  government  has  been  made.  To 
conduct  such  an  examination  of  the  system  of  local  gov- 
ernment in  the  United  States  is  the  purpose  of  this  work, 
but  it  will  aid  us  in  our  undertaking  if  we  precede  our 
study  of  local  government  in  the  United  States  by  a  very 
brief  presentation  of  the  system  of  local  government 
as  developed  in  two  of  the  leading  countries  of  Europe, 
England  and  France.  The  English  system  of  local  gov- 
ernment is  of  obvious  interest  and  importance  for  pur- 
poses of  comparison  in  connection  with  the  study  of  the 
system  in  the  United  States,  not  only  because  historically 
it  was  the  antecedent  of  the  system  found  in  the  colonies 
and  continued  in  the  states,  but  also  because  it  has  the 
same  background  of  law  and  general  conceptions  of 
liberty  and  government.  The  study  of  French  local  gov- 
ernment, on  the  other  hand,  is  of  prime  importance  also 
because  it  represents  the  other  main  type  of  local  admin- 
istration which,  in  contradistinction  to  the  English  or 
Anglo-Saxon  system  may  properly  be  designated  the  con- 
tinental system,  since  virtually  all  the  countries  of  con- 
tinental Europe,  as  well  as  the  South  American  countries, 


4  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

and  even  Japan  in  the  East,  have  followed  the  French 
type  or  system  of  local  administration. 

Local  Government  in  England  * 

The  Origin  of  Local  Government  in  England. — 

In  the  earliest  organized  system  of  government  in  Eng- 
land concerning  which  we  have  definite  information,  the 
Anglo-Saxon  kingdom,  we  find  a  system  of  local  gov- 
ernment well  developed  and  exhibiting  marked  char- 
acteristics which  were  not  without  influence  on  the  entire 
later  history  of  the  system  in  England  and  not  without 
interesting  points  of  similarity  and  contrast  with  the 
systems  of  other  European  countries. 

The  kingdom  was  divided  for  purposes  of  adminis- 
tration as  early  as  the  tenth  century  at  least  into 
shires,  corresponding  generally  to  the  formerly  independ- 
ent kingdoms.  The  shires  were,  therefore,  historical 
divisions  with  a  certain  homogeneity  and  local  tradition. 
They  were  also  democratic,  regarded  in  the  light  of 
political  conditions  of  that  time,  for  there  was  a  repre- 
sentative  assembly  called   the   shire-moot,    in   which  all 

i  A  comprehensive  treatment  of  English  local  government  can 
be  found  in  Redlich  and  Hirst,  Local  Government  in  England,  two 
vols.  (London,  1903).  Among  briefer  works  may  be  mentioned 
Ashley,  English  Local  Government  (London,  1905)  ;  Odgers,  Local 
Government  (London,  1913)  5  and  Maxwell,  English  Local  Gov- 
ernment (London.  1900).  The  subject  is  treated  also  in  special 
chapters  in  Lowell,  Government  of  England  (New  York,  1919),  II, 
Chaps,  xxxviii-xlvi ;  Ashley,  Local  and  Central  Government 
(London,  1906),  Chaps,  i  and  v;  and  Goodnow,  Comparative  Ad- 
ministrative Law  (New  York,  1893),  L  Book  III,  Chap.  v.  There 
are  various  works  dealing  especially  with  city  government  in  Great 
Britain  among  which  may  be  mentioned  Shaw,  Municipal  Govern- 
ment in  Great  Britain  (New  York,  1898)  ;  and  Howe.  The  British 
City  (New  York,  1907).  A  convenient  treatment  will  be  found  in 
Munro,  The  Government  of  European  Cities  (New  York,  1909), 
Chap.  iii. 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  5 

freemen  had  a  voice,  directly  or  through  representatives. 
The  shire-moot  met  twice  a  year  and  performed  both  leg- 
islative and  judicial  functions  for  the  shire,  which  re- 
mained virtually  autonomous  as  regards  all  matters  of 
internal  government.  The  central  power,  to  which  the 
freeman  owed  practically  only  the  duties  of  military  ser- 
vice and  the  repair  of  bridges  and  fortifications,  was  rep- 
resented by  the  ealdorman,  or  earl,  who  was  usually 
the  chief  land  holder  in  the  shire  and  who  was  appointed 
by  the  king.  He  presided  over  the  shire-moot.  With 
the  growth  of  the  power  of  the  Church  the  bishops  also 
attained  to  some  importance  in  the  governmental  affairs 
of  the  shire.  Later  in  the  Saxon  period  an  officer  called 
the  shire-reeve,  or  sheriff,  was  appointed  as  assistant  to 
the  earl,  who  as  chief  police,  financial,  and  judicial  officer 
of  the  crown  gradually  supplanted  the  latter. 

Within  the  shire  itself  there  were  smaller  governmental 
units  which  constituted  the  continuation  of  the  system 
of  local  government  in  the  separate  kingdoms  before  they 
were  united  under  one  crown.  These  were  the  townships, 
the  boroughs,  and  the  hundreds.  The  townships  and 
boroughs  were  the  original  communities,  or  aggregates 
of  people,  the  former  being  a  group  of  homesteads  sur- 
rounded by  a  tun  or  hedge,  with  outlying  fields  and 
meadows,  the  latter  a  "  burh  "  or  fortified  place  con- 
sisting originally  of  the  castle  and  courtyard  of  a  noble- 
man under  whose  protection  a  (group  of  freemen  congre- 
gated in  a  community,  with  a  ditch  and  mound  as  forti- 
fication. 

In  the  township  there  existed  a  primary  assembly  of 
all  freemen  which  managed  all  the  affairs  of  the  town- 
ship, but  had  no  judicial  functions.  This  democratic  in- 
stitution was  the,  real  cradle  of  English  liberty. 

The  township  had  its  own  officers,  the  reeve  as  finan- 


6  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

cial  officer,  the  pindar  as  manager  of  the  commons, 
and  the  tithing  man  as  peace  officer. 

The  greater  security  of  the  boroughs,  which  became 
centers  of  trade  and  of  craftmanship,  led  gradually  to 
their  increased  size,  importance,  and  powers  as  com- 
pared with  the  townships,  which  remained  distinctly 
rural  in  character.  There  was  a  borough  court  or  primary 
assembly,  comprising  all  freemen  who  paid  local  taxes, 
which  passed  by-laws  and,  in  the  boroughs  independent 
of  a  lord,  elected  the  officers.  The  boroughs  were  or- 
iginally coordinate  with  the  townships  but  during  the 
Saxon  period  many  of  them  had  been  taken  out  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  hundred,  which  consisted  of  a 
group  of  townships. 

These  hundreds  were  principally  areas  for  judicial  ad- 
ministration and  the  preservation  of  the  peace  and  were 
governed  by  a  hundred  court,  composed  of  the  reeve  and 
four  representatives  from  each  township.  The  hundred 
was,  as  opposed  to  the  townships,  boroughs,  and  coun- 
ties, an  artificial  rather  than  a  natural  governmental 
unit.  At  the  head  of  the  hundred  was  the  chief  con- 
stable elected  by  the  hundred  court. 

Such  was  the  system  of  local  government  found  by 
William  the  Conqueror  when  he  acquired  the  crown  of 
England;  a  system  characterized  by  democracy  and  lo- 
cal autonomy  with  but  little  interference  by  the  central 
authorities. 

The  Development  of  Local  Government  in  Eng- 
land.—  Beginning  with  the  Norman  period  a  develop- 
ment towards  centralization  and  a  corresponding  de- 
crease in  local  autonomy  began  which  in  considerable 
measure  upset  the  traditions  of  local  government  estab- 
lished in  the  Saxon  period.  Particularly  was  this  true 
in   the   shires,   now   called   counties,   the  territories   of 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  7 

the  count  who  succeeded  to  the  place  of  the  earl.  The 
shire-moot  became  the  county  court,  and  the  sheriff  the 
real  administrative  head  of  the  county,  virtually  noth- 
ing being  left  to  the  control  of  the  county  court,  which 
still  continued,  however,  as  a  representative  body.  But 
instead  of  being  democratic  in  composition,  it  became 
an  aristocratic  body  consisting  largely  of  the  chief  land- 
holders. The  system  of  county  administration  by  the 
sheriff,  whose  office  was  changed  under  Edward  the 
Third  from  a  life  position  to  annual  tenure,  continued 
until  towards  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century  when 
the  royal  courts  took  over  the  criminal  jurisdiction  of 
the  county  courts,  and  the  justices  of  the  peace,  appointed 
by  the  Crown,  took  over  the  administrative  functions 
of  the  sheriff.  In  this  way  the  county  virtually  ceased 
to  be  an  area  of  local  self-government,  until  the  reform 
of  1888,  as  the  administrative  functions  that  success- 
ively developed  were  entrusted  to  these  centrally  ap- 
pointed officers,  completely  independent  of  local  control. 

In  the  same  way  the  Saxon  hundred  gradually  dimin- 
ished in  importance,  and  although  the  hundred  court 
continued  to  meet  and  was  made  responsible  for  the 
preservation  of  the  peace  in  its  jurisdiction,  the  estab- 
lishment and  development  of  the  office  of  justices  in  the 
counties  resulted  in  the  decay  and  disappearance  of  the 
hundred  as  an  area  of  local  administration.  The  need 
of  an  administrative  area  within  the  county  larger  than 
the  township  was  again  recognized,  however,  in  the  re- 
form legislation  at  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

The  township,  on  the  other  hand,  did  not  suffer  an 
appreciable  alteration  under  the  Normans,  by  whom  it 
was  called  vill.  It  continued  as  an  essentially  demo- 
cratic unit  of  local  government  for  the  management  of 
its  own  petty  affairs,  recognizing  its  obligation  to  pay 


8  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  royal  dues  to  the  Crown.  But  with  the  firm  estab- 
lishment of  the  feudal  manor  under  the  Plantagenets  the 
township,  or  vill,  began  a  struggle  for  its  continued 
existence  as  a  democratic  unit  of  local  self-government. 
The  manor  might  include  one  or  more  vills,  and  the 
lord  of  the  manor  was  virtual  dictator,  succeeding  to 
the  common  lands  of  the  township,  entitled  to  military 
and  personal  services  from  the  freemen  of  the  manor, 
and  holding  the  other  peasants  in  serfdom,  bound  to 
the  soil.  The  affairs  of  the  manor  were  managed  by 
the  manorial  court  under  the  direction  of  the  lord  baron, 
or  of  his  stewards,  if  the  lord  had  jurisdiction  over  sev- 
eral manors,  and  the  township  meeting  lost  its  powers, 
though  it  continued  in  existence. 

This  extinction  of  autonomy  and  democracy  in  the 
ultimate  unit  of  government  in  the  rural  areas  would 
undoubtedly  have  been  complete  except  for  the  develop- 
ment of  the  parish  during  the  same  period,  which  parish 
was  destined  to  become  the  successor  of  the  township  and 
to  perpetuate  the  traditions  of  the  early  system  of  self- 
government.  The  parish  was  originally  the  area  which 
supported  a  church  and  was  presided  over  by  the  parish 
priest.  It  was  frequently  coextensive  with  the  town- 
ship, though  sometimes  a  parish  comprised  a  number 
of  townships.  The  priest  became  the  champion  of  the 
interests  of  the  peasants  over  against  the  manorial  lord 
and  his  stewards  and  revived  the  local  democratic  meet- 
ing in  the  parish  meeting,  held  in  the  church  over  which 
the  lord  of  the  manor  had  no  control. 

In  the  long  struggle  between  the  feudal  lords  and  the 
parishioners,  led  by  the  priest,  the  latter  were  ultimately 
successful  and  so  preserved  the  tradition  of  local-  self- 
government.  For  the  business  of  the  parish  meeting  was 
not  limited  to  ecclesiastical  matters  and  the  officers  elected 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  9 

by  the  parish  meeting  performed  civil  as  well  as  eccles- 
iastical functions.  While  the  powers  of  the  feudal  lords 
declined  as  those  of  the  monarchy  increased,  the  parish 
meeting  increased  in  importance  with  the  assumption 
of  new  activities  as  they  developed.  The  parish  as- 
sembly came  to  be  called  the  vestry  when  its  place  of 
meeting  was  changed  from  the  church  itself  to  the  vestry 
room. 

The  parishes  continued  to  increase  in  importance  as 
governmental  units,  especially  after  the  Act  of  1601 
imposed  upon  them  the  duty  of  poor  relief,  and  per- 
formed in  addition  to  their  former  activities,  functions 
both  for  the  parish  itself  in  the  matter  of  assessment 
and  collection  of  rates,  highways,  sanitation,  burial 
grounds,  etc.,  and  for  the  central  authorities  as  well  in 
regard  to  voters'  lists  and  other  matters.  The  civil 
parish  came  to  be  distinct  from  the  ecclesiastical  parish 
in  the  course  of  later  legislation  but  at  the  outset  they 
were  one.  The  later  differentiation  added  another  factor 
to  the  growing  confusion  of  local  government  areas. 

While  the  townships  were  thus  preserved  after  the 
Norman  Conquest  as  ultimate  units  of  local  self-govern- 
ment, and  merged  into  the  parishes  which  remain  to-day 
as  the  smallest  areas  of  local  government,  the  boroughs 
were  also  undergoing  a  process  of  development  and 
transformation.  Under  the  Normans  and  Plantagenets 
the  number  of  boroughs  increased  and  they  also  grew  in 
size,  though  only  slowly.  However,  instead  of  being 
dependent  on  the  lords  near  whose  castles  they  grew 
up,  they*  came  generally  to  be  immediately  subordinate 
to  the  king  from  whom  they  acquired  valuable  privileges 
by  charter  grant,  such  as  the  compounding  of  the  royal 
feudal  dues,  which  freed  the  boroughs  from  the  visits 
of  the  sheriff  as  royal  financial  officer,  and  the  establish- 


io  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ment  of  their  own  courts  free  from  the  supervision  of  the 
sheriff  as  executive  officer  of  the  county  courts. 

For  the  performance  of  these  functions  as  well  as 
for  the  administration  of  borough  property  and  the  man- 
agement of  the  borough  markets  and  fairs  the  burgesses 
generally  had  the  power  of  electing  their  own  officers. 
The  borough  government  at  this  time,  therefore,  con- 
tinued as  a  democratic  organization  with  a  considerably 
enlarged  measure  of  local  autonomy.  In  the  twelfth 
and  thirteenth  centuries  boroughs  continued  to  increase 
in  number  and  size  and  also  in  powers,  as  such  valuable 
privileges  as  that  of  guild  merchant  or  monopoly  in  trade, 
and  representation  in  Parliament  were  added  by  royal 
grant. 

But  with  the  thirteenth  century  the  character  of  bor- 
ough government  changed  from  that  of  a  direct  demo- 
cracy in  which  the  burgesses  elected  their  own  officers  in 
general  meeting,  to  government  by  a  council,  mayor, 
and  aldermen  who,  at  first  chosen  by  all  the  burgesses, 
gradually  tended  to  become  self -perpetuating  bodies. 
Thus,  while  the  importance  of  the  boroughs  as  govern- 
mental units  increased,  their  democratic  character  dimin- 
ished; until  by  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century  the 
typical  English  boroughs  were  close  corporations.  Fur- 
thermore, as  the  struggle  between  the  Crown  and  Parlia- 
ment became  more  and  more  acute  the  King,  in  order 
to  control  the  representatives  sent  to  Parliament  by  the 
boroughs,  granted  to  them  charters  of  incorporation, 
naming  the  persons  in  whom  the  powers  of  government 
should  be  vested,  and  giving  them  the  right  to  choose  their 
successors.  By  these  means  the  system  of  undemo- 
cratic borough  government  was  firmly  established  and 
it  was  not  until  the  reform  legislation  of  the  nineteenth 
century  that  it  was  essentially  altered. 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  n 

It  is  not  within  the  scope  of  this  treatment  to  trace 
the  various  developments  that  occurred  in  the  English 
system  of  local  government  during  the  centuries  between 
the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  present  time,  es- 
pecially as  the  general  scheme  indicated  above  was  not 
materially  changed  until  the  nineteenth  century,  which 
saw  thoroughgoing  reforms  in  the  whole  field  of  local 
government.  The  scope  of  these  reforms  and  their 
consequences,  therefore,  will  be  briefly  considered  at  this 
point.  It  is  important  to  note  at  the  outset,  however, 
that  these  reforms  waited  upon  the  reform  of  Parliament 
itself  in  the  direction  of  greater  democracy  of  repre- 
sentation, a  reform  begun  by  the  Act  of  1832  and  con- 
tinued in  the  later  franchise  acts. 

The  first  important  measure  was  passed  in  1834  and 
related  to  the  administration  of  poor  relief,  which,  in 
the  hands  of  the  parishes  and  under  the  direction  of  the 
justices  of  the  peace,  had  degenerated  into  a  deplorable 
condition.  By  this  act  a  new  administrative  division  was 
created,  the  poor-law  union,  comprising  a  number  of 
poor-law  parishes  and  having  its  own  representative  body 
operating  under  the  strictest  supervision  and  direction  of 
a  central  administrative  board;  the  first  instance  in  the 
modern  period  in  England  of  a  strong  central  adminis- 
trative supervision  over  the  acts  of  the  subordinate  divi- 
sions, which  had  come  to  be  practically  free  from  ade- 
quate supervision. 

The  next  important  measure  was  the  Municipal  Cor- 
porations Act  of  1835  which  did  away  with  the  old  un- 
democratic, corrupt,  inefficient,  and  uncontrolled  bor- 
ough government.  Although  the  organs  of  city  govern- 
ment were  not  altered  in  name,  they  were  now  elected 
on  a  relatively  democratic  basis.  By  successive  acts  new 
powers  were  conferred  on  the  boroughs,  both  individ- 


12  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ually  and  by  general  laws,  powers  which  it  would  not 
have  been  expedient  to  confer  upon  the  unre formed  bor- 
oughs, and  which  were  exercised  under  an  increasingly 
comprehensive  system  of  central  administrative  control. 
By  this  legislation  the  peculiar  needs  of  cities  as  distinct 
from  rural  areas  were  recognized  and  accorded  special 
consideration,  the  various  laws  being  codified  in  the 
Municipal  Corporations  Consolidation  Act  of  1882. 
This  Act,  supplemented  by  later  legislation,  comprises 
the  general  municipal  code  for  English  boroughs,  in 
addition  to  which  there  are  countless  acts  dealing  with 
individual  municipalities. 

The  parish,  deprived  by  the  Act  of  1834  of  its  chief 
local  function,  the  administration  of  poor  relief,  as  well 
as  of  other  activities  that  were  one  by  one  conferred  upon 
newly  constituted  authorities,  gradually  sank  into  insigni- 
ficance and  declined  into  an  area  for  taxation  and  electoral 
purposes  only.  Not  until  1894,  by  the  passage  of  the 
Local  Government  Act,  did  the  parish  again  become  the 
primary  unit  of  rural  local  government.  As  a  unit  of 
urban  government  it  had  lost  its  significance  even  earlier 
and  as  it  was  not  needed  there  it  was  not  revived. 

Characteristic  of  the  nineteenth  century  legislation  with 
regard  to  rural  local  government  in  England  was  the 
plan  of  meeting  each  new  governmental  need  as  it  arose 
by  the  creation  of  new  units  instead  of  entrusting  the  new 
functions  to  existing  agencies.  The  hundred  had  dis- 
appeared as  a  governmental  unit  long  before  but  in  its 
place  there  were  constituted  successively  highway  dis- 
tricts, conservancy  districts,  health  districts,  improve- 
ment districts,  burial  districts,  school  districts,  and 
others,  each  with  its  local  authority  and  each  an  area 
independent  of  and  cutting  across  all  existing  boundar- 
ies.    Not  until  the  Local  Government  Acts  of  1888  and 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  13 

1894  was  a  serious  attempt  made  to  straighten  out  this 
tangle  of  local  areas,  an  attempt  which  has  not  com- 
pletely succeeded  even  to  the  present  day. 

The  Act  of  1888  reconstituted  the  whole  system  of 
county  government  and  provided  the  same  general  scheme 
of  government  for  the  county  as  had  been  established 
for  the  boroughs  in  1835,  namely  a  representative  coun- 
cil elected  on  a  democratic  basis  for  the  administration 
of  all  county  affairs.  By  the  Act  of  1894  new  county 
divisions  were  created  called  county  districts  to  which 
were  entrusted  a  great  part  of  the  powers  that  had  been 
conferred  upon  the  special  authorities  previously  created. 
These  special  authorities  thereupon  ceased  for  the  most 
part  to  exist. 

During  this  period,  furthermore,  the  establishment  of 
central  authorities  with  powers  of  supervision  and  con- 
trol over  local  governments  continued.  In  1848  a  Gen- 
eral Board  of  Health  was  created  with  functions  relat- 
ing to  the  administration  of  public  health  similar  to  those 
of  the  Poor  Law  Board  in  the  field  of  poor  relief. 
Though  this  Board  was  subsequently  discontinued  and 
its  functions  divided  between  the  Home  Office  and  the 
Privy  Council,  its  powers,  together  with  those  of  the 
Poor  Law  Board  plus  a  number  of  others,  were  concen- 
trated by  Act  of  1 87 1  in  the  hands  of  the  newly  created 
Local  Government  Board.  In  1862  the  Board  of  Trade 
had  been  established  to  which  an  increasing  number  of 
administrative  powers  affecting  local  governments  have 
been  gradually  granted.  In  1889  the  Board  of  Agricul- 
ture was  established,  and  in  1900  the  Board  of  Education 
was  set  up  as  an  independent  central  authority  with  ad- 
ministrative control  over  local  authorities  in  matters  af- 
fecting public  education.  In  1919  the  Ministry  of  Health 
was  created  superseding  the  Local  Government  Board, 


i4  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

taking  over  all  its  functions  and  those  of  the  other  min- 
istries relating  to  public  health. 

Present  Characteristics  of  English  Local  Govern- 
ment.—  Having  traced  very  briefly  the  principal  devel- 
opments in  the  history  of  local  government  in  England 
we  can  now  devote  some  attention  to  a  survey  of  the 
system  as  it  exists  to-day. 

The  County. —  In  the  first  place  it  is  to  be  remarked 
that  there  are  in  England  and  Wales  two  different  kinds 
of  counties,  the  ancient  counties  and  the  administrative 
counties.  The  ancient  counties,  of  which  there  are  52, 
are  the  parliamentary  constituencies,  and  militia  and  ju- 
dicial districts.  The  justices  of  the  peace  who  hold  com- 
missions for  the  area  of  these  counties,  although  stripped 
of  most  of  the  administrative  powers  which  they  exercised 
until  the  Act  of  1888  was  passed,  still  perform  some  ad- 
ministrative acts  in  petty,  special,  and  quarter  sessions, 
such  as  granting  exemption  from  vaccination,  granting 
public-house  licenses,  licenses  for  private  asylums  and 
inebriate  homes,  appointing  visitors  of  prisons,  adminis- 
tering the  Act  for  the  reduction  of  liquor  licenses  by 
compensation,  and  sharing  in  the  control  of  the  county 
police.  Otherwise  these  ancient  geographical  counties 
with  their  centrally  appointed  Lord  Lieutenant  and  Sheriff 
need  not  concern  us  here  as  they  are  not  the  real  units  of 
government. 

The  administrative  counties,  of  which  there  are  sixty- 
two,  including  the  County  of  London,  are  government- 
ally  distinct  areas,  though  six  of  them  possess  the  same 
boundaries  as  the  ancient  counties  of  the  same  name 
and  the  majority  of  them  are  very  nearly  identical.  The 
larger  number  of  administrative  counties  is  due  to  the  divi- 
sion of  some  of  the  ancient  counties  into  two  or  more 
administrative  counties.     Hence  it  is  true  in  the  main 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  15 

of  the  administrative  counties  to-day  that  they  are  his- 
torical areas  with  a  community  of  traditions  and  senti- 
ment. 

In  addition  to  and  outside  of  these  administrative 
counties  are  those  boroughs  which  have  been  constituted 
counties  by  themselves,  now  some  seventy-five  in  number, 
which  normally  include  all  boroughs  having  a  population 
of  more  than  fifty  thousand.  As  these  boroughs  use  the 
regular  borough  authorities  for  the  performance  of  all 
their  functions  they  will  be  considered  under  the  head 
of  boroughs.  This  plan  of  constituting  the  larger  cities 
independent  counties  is,  however,  worth  emphasizing  at 
this  place  because  of  its  bearing  on  the  question  of  adopt- 
ing a  similar  plan  in  the  United  States  which,  as  will  be 
seen,  is  one  of  the  newer  tendencies  in  our  local  govern- 
ment. 

The  administrative  counties  are  by  no  means  alike 
either  in  area  or  population  for  they  vary  in  size  from  a 
little  over  a  hundred  square  miles  to  nearly  two  thousand 
square  miles,  and  from  a  population  of  a  few  thousand 
to  a  population  of  around  five  million.  The  average  area 
and  population  are  about  a  thousand  square  miles  and 
three  hundred  thousand  persons,  respectively.  They  con- 
stitute, therefore,  very  considerable  units  of  government, 
viewed  from  either  standpoint. 

In  each  county  there  is  a  county  council  in  which  are 
centered  all  the  governmental  powers  of  the  county. 
This  council  varies  in  size  according  to  the  population  of 
the  county,  from  about  thirty  to  more  than  a  hundred 
and  thirty,  and  is  elected  by  single  member  wards,  or 
districts,  on  a  democratic  basis.  The  councilors  are 
elected  for  three  years,  all  going  out  of  office  together. 
The  councilors  in  turn  choose  a  number  of  aldermen 
equal  to  one-third  of  the  number  of  councilors,  who  hold 


i6  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

office  for  six  years,  one-half  being  elected  every  three 
years.  The  aldermen  are  in  the  same  position  as  the 
popularly  elected  councilors  so  far  as  powers  are  con- 
cerned. 

The  council  appoints  all  necessary  administrative  of- 
ficers except  the  county  clerk  and  the  chief  constable,  who 
are  chosen  by  a  joint  committee  of  the  council  and  of 
the  justices  of  the  peace  of  the  county.  The  council 
selects  its  own  chairman  for  the  period  of  a  year,  with 
re-elections  the  general  rule,  and  the  actual  work  of  the 
council  is  done  principally  through  committees,  as  the 
council  meets  regularly  only  four  times  a  year,  chiefly  be- 
cause of  the  difficulty  of  bringing  together  the  widely 
scattered  members.  The  law  prescribes  committees  on 
finance,  education,  and  asylums,  in  addition  to  the  joint 
committee  on  police  mentioned  above.  The  committees 
on  finance  and  on  police  enjoy  by  law  certain  indepen- 
dent powers  and  the  other  committees  can  be  and  usually 
are  entrusted  with  large  powers  of  independent  action, 
except  as  regards  the  making  of  rates  and  loans.  All 
members  of  the  council,  including  aldermen  and  mayor, 
serve  without  pay.  Perhaps  the  most  striking  feature 
of  the  organization  of  the  county  government  in  Eng- 
land is  the  fact  that  there  is  no  executive  head  of  the 
county,  the  chairman  having  no  legal  powers  greater 
than  those  of  the  ordinary  members  of  the  council. 

The  powers  of  the  county  councils  are  very  extensive, 
they  having  fallen  heir  to  the  administrative  powers  of 
the  justices  of  the  peace,  and  include  both  mandatory  and 
permissive  powers.  The  county  is  the  highway  author- 
ity for  the  main  roads  and  county  bridges.  It  may  con- 
struct or  assist  light  railways.  It  is  the  education  au- 
thority and  as  such  must  insure  the  provision  of  sufficient 
elementary  education  and  may  also  supply  or  aid  the  pro- 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  17 

vision  of  higher  education.  It  has  large  sanitary  powers 
with  regard  to  pure  foods  and  drugs,  diseases  of  ani- 
mals, and  river  pollution.  It  takes  care  of  county  prop- 
erty and  institutions  and  may  establish  hospitals,  asylums, 
reformatories,  and  industrial  schools.  It  also  grants  cer- 
tain licenses  and  registers  scientific,  charitable,  and  relig- 
ious societies.  It  has  the  power  to  enact  by-laws  applic- 
able outside  the  limits  of  the  boroughs. 

In  addition  to  these  powers  of  direct  action  the  county 
acts  as  an  important  supervisory  authority  over  some  of 
the  subordinate  areas.  This  power  is  greatest  over  the 
parishes,  covering  such  matters  as  the  approval  of  loans, 
orders  for  the  compulsory  purchase  of  land,  and  changes 
in  boundaries.  Over  the  county  districts  the  council  has 
the  power  of  compelling  action  under  the  sanitation  acts 
and  in  the  matter  of  preventing  obstructions  of  public 
rights  of  way.  Over  the  non-county  borough,  the  powers 
of  the  county  are  slight,  the  boroughs  being,  however, 
part  of  the  county  for  taxation  and  judicial  purposes  and 
being  represented  on  the  council.  But  under  the  Act 
of  1888  the  Local  Government  Board  could  transfer  to 
the  county  councils  the  powers  of  the  central  authorities 
over  local  affairs,  which  would  tremendously  increase 
the  importance  of  the  county.  This  has  not,  however, 
been  done  to  any  extent  as  yet,  the  non-county  boroughs 
and  urban  districts  being  unalterably  opposed  to  any  such 
action.  Of  course  the  county  boroughs  are  by  definition 
not  subject  to  control  by  any  administrative  county. 

The  above  powers  conferred  on  counties  by  general 
laws  are  supplemented  by  special  powers  granted  to  indi- 
vidual counties  by  private  bill  legislation  so  that  the 
various  counties  may  differ  considerably  among  them- 
selves as  to  the  extent  of  powers  and  functions  over  and 
above  those  enumerated. 


18  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

For  the  performance  of  all  of  these  activities  the  county 
needs  ever  increasing  funds.  The  income  of  the  county 
comes  from  a  number  of  different  sources,  including 
fines;  income  from  property;  grants  from  the  National 
Exchequer  Contribution  Account  for  specific  purposes, 
such  as  police,  health,  and  secondary  education;  and 
county  rates.  The  last  named  constitute  by  far  the  most 
important  source  of  current  income  and  are  collected  pro 
rata  from  the  parishes  on  the  basis  of  their  property  val- 
uations, or  by  special  rates  on  such  portions  of  the  county 
as  are  specially  benefited  by  an  undertaking.  In  col- 
lecting these  rates  the  county  makes  use  of  the  officers 
of  the  poor-law  unions  and  parishes. 

For  permanent  improvements  the  county  is  authorized 
to  borrow  money,  not  in  excess  of  one-tenth  of  the  rate- 
able value  and  for  a  period  not  exceeding  thirty  years. 
But  every  loan  must  be  approved  by  the  Local  Govern- 
ment Board,  since  1919  the  Ministry  of  Health,  as  must 
those  of  all  other  local  areas.  In  the  expenditure  of  its 
funds  the  county  must  act  through  its  finance  committee 
which,  as  has  been  seen,  has  independent  powers  for  the 
purpose  of  control  as  to  the  legality  of  the  proposed  ex- 
penditure. The  accounts  of  the  county,  like  those  of 
the  other  local  areas  except  the  boroughs,  are  subject  to 
a  careful  and  effective  audit  by  officers  of  the  Ministry 
of  Health.2 

2  In  1919  Parliament  created,  as  part  of  its  reconstruction  program, 
a  new  ministry  called  the  Ministry  of  Health.  This  new  govern- 
ment department  took  the  place  of  the  Local  Government  Board 
and,  although  it  was  created  for  the  specific  purpose  of  handling 
all  matters  connected  with  public  health,  it  was  endowed  with  all 
the  powers  and  functions  of  the  Local  Government  Board,  not 
merely  those  relating  to  the  administrative  direction  and  supervision 
of  the  areas  of  local  government  in  the  matter  of  public  health. 
It  is  the  intention  of  the  Government  to  transfer  the  other  powers 
to  other  departments  of  government,  but  as  that  will  be  a  slow 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  19 

County  Subdivisions. — There  are  now  six  different 
classes  of  regular  local  government  areas  within  the  ad- 
ministrative county;  boroughs,  urban  districts,  rural 
districts,  poor-law  unions,  rural  parishes,  and  urban 
parishes.  The  special  units  still  in  existence  are  relatively 
few  and  steadily  diminishing  in  relative  importance. 

Urban  Parishes  and  Poor-Law  Unions. —  The  urban 
parishes,  that  is,  those  in  the  boroughs  and  urban  dis- 
tricts, are  virtually  areas  merely  for  the  administration 
of  poor  relief,  and  even  for  that  purpose  they  are  insig- 
nificant, as  the  real  work  of  poor  relief  is  done  by  the 
officers  of  the  poor-law  union  under  the  strictest  direc- 
tion of  the  Ministry  of  Health.  These  areas  continue, 
therefore,  as  units  for  a  single  purpose  and  bear  no  nec- 
essary relations  to  the  boundaries  of  the  other  areas. 
For  that  reason  they  will  not  be  considered  further  in 
this  brief  presentation,  but  it  is  important  to  note  that 
they  constitute  one  of  the  distinctive  features  of  the  Eng- 
lish system  in  relation  to  a  phase  of  local  administration 
which  has  been  but  imperfectly  developed  in  the  United 
States  up  to  the  present.3  They  have  a  larger  signifi- 
cance, however,  in  that  the  assessment  of  the  poor  rate 
is  commonly  used  as  the  basis  for  assessing  all  other  local 
rates  and  the  poor-law  officers  in  the  parishes  and  poor- 
law  unions  are  frequently  made  responsible  for  the  collec- 
tion of  these  other  rates,  as  in  the  case  of  the  county  rate 
noted  above. 

and  gradual  process  the  Ministry  of  Health  is  for  the  present  at 
least  the  successor  of  the  Local  Government  Board  in  all  respects 
and  will,  therefore,  be  referred  to  herein  as  such,  it  being  kept 
in  mind  that  gradually  all  the  powers  of  supervision  over  local 
authorities  not  connected  with  public  health  will  be  transferred  from 
the  Ministry  of  Health  to  other  departments  not  yet  determined. 

3  For  convenient  brief  discussions  of  the  subject  of  poor  law  ad- 
ministration in  England  see  Odgers,  op.  cit.,  Chap,  v,  and  Ashley, 
Local  and  Central  Government,  pp.  52-60. 


20  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Rural  Parishes. — The  rural  parish,  then,  is  the  small- 
est unit  of  general  local  government.  But  even  rural 
parishes  are  by  no  means  uniform  in  population  or  area 
nor  are  they  necessarily  rural  in  character,  for  by  rural 
parish  is  meant  simply  one  which  is  not  within  a  borough 
or  an  urban  district.  A  considerable  number  of  rural 
parishes  in  fact  are  as  populous  and  densely  settled  as 
some  of  the  boroughs.  But  of  the  thirteen  thousand 
parishes  in  England  about  ninety  per  cent  have  a  popula- 
tion of  less  than  a  thousand  and  some  two  thousand  have 
fewer  than  a  hundred  inhabitants  each.  For  purposes  of 
government  the  parishes  are  divided  into  those  with  a 
population  of  more  than  three  hundred  which  have  a 
parish  council  chosen  by  the  parochial  electors  in  parish 
meeting,  and  those  with  a  population  of  less  than  three 
hundred  which  normally  have  only  a  primary  assembly. 
But  parishes  having  between  a  hundred  and  three  hun- 
dred persons  may  provide  for  councils,  and  even  the 
smallest  parishes  may  establish  them  with  the  consent  of 
the  county  council.  Parish  councils  vary  in  size  from 
five  to  fifteen  members. 

Parish  meetings  consisting  of  the  parochial  electors 
and  including  women  whether  married  or  not  are  held 
at  least  once  a  year  and  where  there  is  a  council  this  is 
usually  elected  for  a  three-year  period.  The  officers  of 
the  parish,  aside  from  the  chairman  of  the  parish  meet- 
ing, are  the  overseers  of  the  poor,  unpaid  officers  elected 
annually  by  the  meeting  or  council.  The  overseers  make 
and  levy  the  poor  rate,  give  relief  in  cases  of  immediate 
urgency,  prepare  the  jury  list,  and  make  out  the  lists  of 
voters  for  parliamentary  and  local  elections. 

The  scope  of  powers  of  the  parishes  is  not  inconsider- 
able for  it  was  intended  to  make  them  really  vital  areas 
of  self-government  by  granting  them  a  wide  range  of 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  21 

powers  by  permissive  or  so-called  adoptive  acts.  So 
the  acquisition  of  rights  of  way,  control  over  foot-paths, 
management  of  parish  property,  the  granting  of  allot- 
ments, the  provision  of  recreation  facilities  such  as  parks, 
baths,  and  wash-houses,  the  provision  of  lighting,  fire 
protection,  and  burial  grounds,  and  the  inspection  of  san- 
itary conditions  for  report  to  the  district  council,  are  all 
within  the  powers  accorded  to  the  parishes.  In  addition 
the  parish  appoints  trustees  for  the  civil  charities  and 
representatives  on  the  boards  of  the  public  elementary 
schools.  But  the  income  of  the  parish  is  very  limited, 
the  general  parish  rate  being  limited  to  sixpence  in  the 
pound,  and  the  special  rates  allowed  under  the  adoptive 
acts  being  insufficient  in  most  cases  for  the  purposes. 
Hence  the  actual  scope  of  activities  of  the  rural  parish  has 
been  very  restricted,  and  in  spite  of  the  democratic  nature 
of  the  local  government  it  has  aroused  little  interest. 

County  Districts. —  The  Act  of  1888  which  established 
the  parishes  and  counties  as  modern  local-government 
areas  provided  also  that  there  should  be  county  districts 
between  the  parishes  and  the  counties.  It  was  the  Act  of 
1894,  however,  which  defined  the  districts  and  deter- 
mined their  organization  and  powers.  By  the  Public 
Health  Act  of  1872  the  country  was  divided  into  urban 
and  rural  sanitary  districts  and  these  were  taken  as  the 
basis  for  the  new  county  districts  for  general  purposes 
of  local  administration. 

The  rural  districts,  nearly  seven  hundred  in  number, 
are  usually  coterminous  with  the  rural  poor-law  unions, 
which  latter  were  indeed  the  areas  entrusted  with  rural 
sanitary  administration  by  the  Act  of  1872.  In  these 
cases  of  territorial  identity,  the  governing  body  of  the 
rural  district  is  identical  in  personnel  with  the  gov- 
erning body  of  the  union,  the  rural  district  council  acting 


22  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

also  as  the  board  of  poor-law  guardians.  But  their  legal 
powers  and  functions  are  distinct  for  the  two  purposes 
and  where  a  poor-law  union  is  composed  of  both  rural  and 
urban  districts  only  the  rural  portions  of  the  union  have 
the  same  persons  as  district  councilors  and  poor-law 
guardians. 

The  governing  body  of  the  rural  district  is  the  district 
council,  composed  of  members  elected  for  three  years  by 
the  parochial  electors  in  each  parish,  one-third  of  the 
councilors  retiring  each  year. 

The  chief  function  of  the  rural  districts  is  the  care  of 
public  health  and  for  that  purpose  they  are  vested  with 
large  powers  including  the  provision  of  sewers  and  meth- 
ods of  sewage  disposal,  drainage,  and  water  supply. 
They  are  in  fact  compelled  to  see  that  every  house  is 
properly  provided  with  drainage  and  pure  water.  The 
rural  district  council  is  charged  with  the  prevention  and 
abatement  of  nuisances.  For  these  purposes  it  must  ap- 
point a  medical  officer  of  health  and  an  inspector  of 
nuisances,  who  are  charged  also  with  the  inspection  of 
the  food  supply.  In  addition  to  these  compulsory  func- 
tions with  regard  to  public  health  the  district  councils 
may  adopt  further  powers  under  the  various  health  acts, 
such  as  the  Infectious  Disease  Act,  etc.,  and  with  the  ap- 
proval of  the  Ministry  of  Health,  which  exercises  a  close 
supervision  over  the  rural  districts  in  matters  of  public 
health,  rural  districts  may  receive  all  of  the  powers  en- 
joyed by  the  urban  districts  under  the  public  health  acts. 

Besides  being  the  chief  sanitary  authority  for  rural 
areas,  the  rural  district  is  also  an  important  highway  au- 
thority. All  highways  except  the  main  roads  are  in 
charge  of  the  district  council  which  is  charged  with  the 
duties  of  construction  and  maintenance,  and  the  preven- 
tion of  obstructions  and  encroachments  thereon. 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  23 

Third,  the  rural  district  may  provide  allotments  and 
workingmen's  houses  and,  with  the  approval  of  the 
county  council,  aid  persons  in  maintaining  rights  of  com- 
mon within  the  district. 

With  the  approval  of  the  Ministry  of  Health  the  rural 
district  council  may  adopt  by-laws  for  the  carrying  out 
of  its  powers,  and  many  of  the  licensing  powers  formerly 
entrusted  to  the  justices  of  the  peace  have  also  been  trans- 
ferred to  the  district  councils. 

Finally,  additional  powers  may  be  conferred  upon  in- 
dividual districts  by  provisional  order  of  the  Ministry 
of  Health.  But  the  conservative  agricultural  districts 
have  not  been  inclined  to  use  their  full  powers. 

For  meeting  the  expenses  of  district  administration  the 
rural  district  council  may  levy  either  private  improve- 
ment rates,  special  rates,  or  general  rates.  Private  im- 
provement rates  may  be  levied  upon  individuals  for  im- 
provements benefiting  their  property  alone.  Special 
rates  are  levied  upon  the  parish  or  parishes  benefited  by 
improvements,  and  the  general  rate  is  collected  from  all 
the  parishes  pro  rata  for  general  district  purposes.  Agri- 
cultural land  is  assessed  at  only  one-fourth.  The  dis- 
tricts may  borrow  money  for  permanent  improvements 
with  the  approval  of  the  Ministry  of  Health,  repayable 
within  sixty  years. 

The  Ministry  of  Health  exercises  very  considerable 
control  over  the  rural  districts,  not  only  as  regards  the  ap- 
proval of  by-laws  and  of  loans  noted  above,  but  also  in 
that  it  may  compel  the  performance  of  the  obligatory 
functions  or  itself  have  the  work  done  and  charge  it  to 
the  district.  The  finances  of  the  district  councils  are, 
moreover,  subject  to  the  strictest  audit  by  agents  of  the 
Ministry  of  Health. 

The  urban  districts  of  to-day,  of  which  there  are  over 


24  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

eight  hundred,  are,  like  the  rural  districts,  the  successors 
of  the  sanitary  districts  into  which  the  country  was  di- 
vided by  the  Act  of  1872.  Although  designated  urban 
districts  they  are  not  necessarily  really  urban  in  character 
for  a  number  of  them  are  very  small  in  population  and 
not  more  densely  settled  than  are  a  good  many  of  the 
rural  districts. 

The  governmental  organization  for  the  urban  district 
is  virtually  the  same  as  for  the  rural  district,  that  is,  a 
district  council  elected  for  three  years  by  the  parochial 
electors,  one-third  of  the  council  retiring  each  year. 
But  in  the  urban  districts  the  district  councilors  do  not 
act  as  poor-law  guardians.  The  council  meets  once  a 
month. 

The  powers  of  the  urban  district  include  in  general 
all  the  powers  granted  to  rural  districts  plus  most  of  those 
granted  to  the  boroughs.  So,  in  addition  to  the  com- 
prehensive sanitary  functions  which  were  conferred  upon 
the  urban  sanitary  districts  established  by  the  Act  of 
1872  and  later  public  health  acts  with  regard  to  sewers, 
drains,  water  supply,  housing,  food  supply,  infectious 
diseases,  nuisances,  the  establishment  of  hospitals,  etc., 
urban  districts  have  more  important  highway  powers, 
having  control  over  all  streets  and  highways,  including 
such  of  the  main  roads  as  they  wish  to  control  themselves 
rather  than  leave  to  the  county.  Furthermore,  the  urban 
districts  have  large  powers  with  regard  to  the  establish- 
ment of  all  manner  of  recreation  facilities,  and  of  public 
utilities  of  various  kinds,  including  gas  works,  electric- 
light  plants,  markets,  tramways,  etc.  In  urban  districts 
having  more  than  twenty  thousand  people  the  district 
council  is  the  local  education  authority  for  elementary 
education. 

The  urban  district  is  under  the  control  of  the  Ministry 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  25 

of  Health  as  regards  the  performance  of  obligatory 
duties  under  the  public  health  acts,  its  by-laws  must  be 
approved  and  its  loans  sanctioned  by  the  same  authority, 
while  its  accounts  are  subjected  to  the  same  careful  audit 
as  those  of  the  rural  districts.  But  the  financial  re- 
sources of  the  urban  districts  are  considerably  greater 
than  those  of  the  rural  districts  not  only  because  the 
lands  have  a  greater  rateable  value  but  also  because  the 
proportion  of  agricultural  land,  which  can  be  rated  at  only 
one-fourth  its  value,  is  much  less.  This  fact,  combined 
with  the  greater  needs  and  progressiveness  of  the  urban 
centers,  has  led  to  a  much  greater  activity  under  the 
adoptive  or  permissive  powers  which  have  been  accorded 
to  both  kinds  of  county  districts.  Thus,  although  the 
legal  and  governmental  status  of  the  urban  districts  is 
very  similar  to  that  of  the  rural  districts,  the  scope  of 
activities,  at  least  of  the  more  densely  populated  urban 
districts,  approaches  more  nearly  that  of  the  boroughs 
than  that  of  the  rural  districts. 

Boroughs. —  As  has  already  been  pointed  out  there  are 
two  general  classes  of  boroughs,  county  boroughs  and 
non-county  boroughs,  the  difference  between  the  two  con- 
sisting in  the  fact  that  the  former  are  not  within  any 
administrative  county  and,  therefore,  perform  all  the 
functions  entrusted  to  the  county  in  addition  to  those 
granted  to  the  boroughs.  But  as  the  organs  of  govern- 
ment are  the  same  in  both  kinds  of  boroughs  and  we  have 
already  surveyed  the  functions  of  the  county  we  shall 
consider  here  only  the  non-county,  or  municipal,  boroughs, 
as  they  are  called.  There  are  some  general  differences 
between  boroughs  even  within  the  class  of  non-county 
boroughs  but  as  these  are  either  merely  formal  as  in  the 
case  of  certain  boroughs  designated  "  cities,"  or  relate 
primarily  to  their  judicial  powers,  it  is  not  necessary  to 


26  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

consider  them  here.  Boroughs  with  a  population  of  less 
than  ten  thousand  have,  however,  as  will  be  seen,  some- 
what less  extensive  powers  in  certain  respects. 

The  Act  of  1835  applied  to  178  boroughs,  but  the  num- 
ber has  since  doubled,  new  charters  being  obtainable  upon 
petition  of  a  majority  of  the  ratepayers  of  the  locality 
after  an  elaborate  administrative  and,  in  case  the  petition 
is  opposed,  a  quasi-judicial  proceeding  before  a  special 
committee  of  Parliament.  No  definite  population  is  re- 
quired for  the  grant  of  a  borough  charter  and  as  a  matter 
of  fact  there  are  the  greatest  variations  in  the  popula- 
tions of  English  boroughs,  ranging  all  the  way  from  a 
thousand  or  two  to  a  million  people. 

The  Municipal  Corporations  Acts  of  1835  and  1882 
prescribed  the  form  of  organization  for  the  boroughs. 
In  each  borough  there  is  elected  a  council  varying  in  size 
from  nine  to  one  hundred  and  three  members,  according 
to  the  provisions  of  the  charter.  This  council  comprises 
councilors,  elected  for  three  years  by  the  borough  elec- 
tors, one-third  retiring  every  year,  a  number  of  alder- 
men equal  to  one-third  of  the  number  of  councilors  and 
chosen  by  them  for  a  term  of  six  years,  and  a  mayor, 
elected  annually  by  the  council.  The  aldermen  enjoy  no 
special  powers  and  even  the  mayor  enjoys  a  ceremonial 
rather  than  a  legal  superiority  over  the  other  members  of 
the  council.  All  these  officers  serve  without  pay,  though 
the  mayor  may  receive  a  remuneration. 

The  borough  franchise  is  still  somewhat  less  demo- 
cratic than  that  of  the  other  units  of  local  government, 
being  based  upon  some  connection  with  rateable  property 
either  as  occupier  or  owner.  But  with  the  passage  of  the 
Franchise  Bill  of  191 8  the  borough  suffrage  was  ex- 
tended to  include  female  parliamentary  electors. 

The  Municipal  Corporations  Acts  did  not  to  any  great 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  27 

extent  determine  the  powers  of  the  boroughs,  though  the 
control  over  local  police,  in  boroughs  with  a  population 
of  more  than  ten  thousand,  was  accorded  to  them  in 
this  way.  Perhaps  the  most  important  functions  of  the 
borough  are  those  resulting  from  its  being  designated 
the  local  sanitary  authority  within  its  jurisdiction  and 
as  such  exercising  the  powers  conferred  by  the  various 
Public  Health  Acts,  the  general  scope  of  which  has  al- 
ready been  noted  in  connection  with  the  county  districts. 
This  includes  such  functions  as  the  provisions  of  drain- 
age and  sewerage,  water  supply,  lighting,  street  improve- 
ments, housing,  markets,  cemeteries,  and  hospitals,  as 
well  as  sanitary  control  over  the  food  supply,  the  preven- 
tion and  abatement  of  nuisances,  and  the  control  of  con- 
tagious diseases.  Under  the  adoptive  acts  the  boroughs 
may  provide  all  sorts  of  recreation  facilities  and  public 
utilities  and  by  private  bill  legislation  individual  boroughs 
have  greatly  increased  the  scope  of  their  activities.  This 
results  in  the  greatest  divergencies  in  the  powers  actually 
exercised  by  boroughs.  By  the  Education  Act  of  1902 
the  borough  council  in  boroughs  with  a  population  of  over 
ten  thousand,  is  the  local  education  authority  for  purposes 
of  elementary  education. 

The  council  performs  legislative  functions  in  the  pas- 
sage of  by-laws  for  the  good  rule  and  government  of  the 
borough,  which  may  be  disallowed  by  the  Ministry  of 
Health  if  in  excess  of  the  borough  powers.  The  admin- 
istrative work  of  the  council  is  carried  on  through  the 
agency  of  committees,  some  of  which  are  obligatory  by 
law,  such  as  the  watch  or  police  committee,  and  the  educa- 
tion committee,  but,  unlike  the  committees  of  the  county 
council,  the  action  of  these  committees  must  receive  the 
sanction  of  the  council.  Although  the  council  is  required 
to  have  but  four  meetings  a  year,  it  does,  in  the  sizeable 


28  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

boroughs  at  least,  meet  as  often  as  once  a  month  or  even 
more  frequently. 

The  council  appoints  the  professional  administrative  of- 
ficers and  employees,  with  the  exception  of  one  auditor 
who  is  popularly  elected,  the  town  clerk  and  the  treas- 
urer being  required  by  law.  All  these  officials  of  the 
borough,  as  is  also  the  case  with  the  paid  officials  of  the 
other  units  of  local  government,  though  subject  to  re- 
moval by  the  appointing  authority,  hold  office  during 
good  behavior  and  are  not  affected  by  changes  in  the 
political  make-up  of  the  appointing  body. 

For  the  expenses  of  borough  government  the  council 
has  available  the  borough  fund  comprising  the  income 
from  borough  property,  fees,  fines,  etc.,  and  to  sup- 
plement that  it  may  levy  special  and  general  rates  as- 
sessed upon  the  parishes  usually  on  the  basis  of  the  poor- 
rate  valuation  and  collected  by  the  overseers  of  each  par- 
ish. The  borough  also  receives  aid  out  of  the  Exchequer 
Contribution  Account  for  police,  sanitation,  and  educa- 
tion. For  permanent  improvements  the  borough  may 
make  loans  but  only  under  specified  conditions  as  to  term 
and  manner  of  repayment  and  with  the  approval  of  one  or 
more  of  the  central  administrative  authorities,  unless,  as 
is  not  infrequently  the  case,  application  is  had  directly  to 
Parliament  for  authority  by  private  bill  legislation.  With 
the  development  of  municipal  trading  or  the  municipal 
ownership  and  operation  of  public  utilities  by  the  bor- 
oughs the  indebtedness  of  English  boroughs  has  increased 
of  late  years  to  an  enormous  extent,  offset,  however,  in 
large  part  by  the  net  income  from  productive  undertak- 
ings. 

The  boroughs  are  in  general  more  free  from  the  control 
of  the  central  administrative  authorities,  except  to  the 
extent  already  noted,  than  are  the  other  units  of  local 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  29 

government.  Particularly  is  this  true  in  the  matter  of 
accounts,  for  the  Ministry  of  Health  possesses  no  power 
of  audit  and  control  over  the  borough  accounts.  But 
the  central  authority  may  require  financial  statements 
from  the  boroughs  in  a  prescribed  form.  Though  its 
actual  powers,  like  those  of  the  other  central  authorities 
having  supervision  over  the  activities  of  'local  govern- 
ment areas,  are  in  the  case  of  boroughs  chiefly  nega- 
tive, nevertheless  by  reason  of  its  ability  to  aid  the  bor- 
ough through  its  staff  of  experts  the  Board  exercises  a 
positive  influence  of  no  mean  importance. 

Central  Administrative  Control. —  No  survey  of 
English  local  government,  no  matter  how  brief,  would  be 
at  all  adequate  without  a  word  concerning  the  system  of 
central  administrative  control,  which  is  one  of  the  strik- 
ing developments  of  the  last  century  in  England  and 
which  is  of  particular  interest  and  significance  for  the 
study  of  local  government  in  the  United  States  because 
of  the  similarity  of  historical  background  and  govern- 
mental and  legal  traditions  of  the  two  countries.  As  at- 
tention has  already  been  called  to  many  of  the  incidents 
of  this  control  in  the  discussion  of  the  various  units  of 
local  government  and  their  functions,  a  brief  summary  of 
the  system  of  control  will  suffice  at  this  point. 

There  are  five  central  administrative  departments  which 
exercise  some  measure  of  control  over  the  units  of  local 
government  described  above.  These  are  the  Board  of 
Agriculture  and  Fisheries,  the  Board  of  Trade,  the 
Board  of  Education,  the  Home  Office,  and,  by  far  the 
most  important  of  all,  the  Ministry  of  Health.4  It  may  be 
mentioned  here  also  that  the  Treasury  exercises  some  con- 
trol through  its  approval  or  disapproval  of  proposed  local 
loans  for  the  erection  of  public  buildings. 

*  See  note  on  the  new  Ministry  of  Health,  p.  18. 


30  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  Board  of  Agriculture  and  Fisheries  is  the  least  im- 
portant of  the  five  departments  as  an  agency  of  control 
over  the  units  of  local  government,  for  its  jurisdiction 
relates  chiefly  to  the  control  of  diseases  of  animals,  the 
destruction  of  insects,  the  preservation  of  fisheries,  the 
control  of  commons,  the  improvement  of  land,  and  the 
regulation  of  markets. 

The  Board  of  Trade  exercises  control  over  the  local 
bodies  in  connection  with  proposals  for  the  public  under- 
taking of  public  utilities  such  as  water  supplies,  gas  and 
electric  lighting  and  power,  tramways,  etc.,  the  conduct  of 
which  it  supervises  and  requires  reports  on.  In  this  con- 
nection its  powers  are  in  a  measure  coordinate  with  those 
of  the  Ministry  of  Health,  since  almost  all  of  these  under- 
takings can  be  financed  only  by  the  making  of  loans, 
that,  as  has  been  seen,  require  in  every  case  the  assent  of 
this  authority.  Local  ordinances  under  the  Weights 
and  Measures  Act  require  the  approval  of  the  Board  of 
Trade. 

The  Board  of  Education  supervises  and  directs  the 
system  of  elementary  public  education,  as  well  as  science 
and  art  schools  and  normal  schools.  It  advises  in  regard 
to  public  higher  education  with  the  local  education  author- 
ities, inspects  their  systems  on  request  and  distributes  on 
the  basis  of  its  findings  the  subsidies  contributed  by  the 
national  government. 

The  Home  Office  exercises  a  supervision  over  the  police 
systems  of  the  local  areas  which  is  particularly  worthy 
of  notice  as  it  deals  in  an  ingenious  manner  with  a  prob- 
lem of  local  government  that  confronts  us  in  the  United 
States  at  the  present  time  and  has  been  the  source  of  con- 
siderable difficulty.  The  continental  system  of  police  ad- 
ministration, as  will  be  seen  in  the  discussion  of  the 
French  system,  has  been  to  keep  the  local  police  an  arm 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  31 

of  state  administration  with  little  local!  autonomy.  The 
English  tradition  has  been,  however,  for  hundreds  of 
years,  so  strongly  opposed  to  this  plan  as  constituting  a 
serious  infringement  of  the  principle  of  local  self-govern- 
ment, that  a  scheme  of  police  administration  which  would 
give  to  the  central  authorities  even  such  a  measure  of 
power  as  is  exercised  in  matters  of  poor  relief  would  not 
be  acceptable.  Yet  the  need  of  some  measure  of  central 
supervision  was  obvious,  as  complete  local  independence 
in  this  important  regard  might  have  serious  consequences. 
The  plan  adopted,  therefore,  represents  a  middle  course 
between  these  two  extremes.  The  national  treasury 
grants  subventions  in  aid  of  the  support  of  those  local 
police  forces  which  measure  up  to  a  minimum  standard 
of  efficiency  set  up  by  the  Home  Office  and  ascertained 
by  its  inspectors.  As  this  aid  amounts  to  about  one- 
half  the  expense  of  maintaining  the  force  the  local  areas 
are  only  too  glad  to  avail  themselves  of  this  means  of  keep- 
ing down  the  local  rates,  since  it  is  more  economical  to 
bear  half  the  expense  of  an  efficient  police  than  the  whole 
expense  of  an  inefficient  system,  the  ratepayers  them- 
selves, furthermore,  being  directly  interested  in  satisfac- 
tory police  protection.  Hence,  although  the  Home  Office 
has  no  legal  authority  to  dictate  to  the  local  area  concern- 
ing police  administration,  it  does  acquire,  through  its 
power  to  withhold  the  treasury  grants,  the  actual  power 
of  inspection  and  supervision  and  of  insisting  on  mini- 
mum standards  of  efficiency.  This  power  could  ob- 
viously be  used  to  force  the  standards  of  efficiency 
higher  and  higher,  at  least  to  the  point  where  one-half  the 
cost  of  maintaining  a  police  force  up  to  the  standards  re- 
quired by  the  Home  Office  would  equal  the  entire  cost  of 
maintaining  a  less  efficient  force  in  a  condition  satisfactory 
to  the  local  ratepayers.     As  a  matter  of  fact  this  policy 


32  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

has  not  been  pursued  by  the  Home  Office,  for  the  stand- 
ards set  are  not  especially  high,  but  the  scheme  provides 
the  possibility  of  insuring  a  large  measure  of  central  con- 
trol without  arousing  local  sentiment  against  central  inter- 
ference. The  same  principle  is  applied  to  some  extent 
in  other  matters  entrusted  to  the  local  authorities,  as  for 
instance  in  the  matter  of  aid  for  education,  but  in  the 
case  of  the  police  it  represents  the  only  means  of  insur- 
ing central  supervision. 

Aside  from  the  inspection  of  the  police  force  the  Home 
Office  is  also  charged  with  the  approval  of  police  by-laws 
made  by  the  local  authorities,  as  also  with  the  supervision 
of  the  powers  granted  to  local  authorities  under  the  Fac- 
tory Acts. 

The  Ministry  of  Health  in  succeeding  to  the  position 
of  the  Local  Government  Board  is,  for  the  time  being  at 
least,  the  most  important  of  the  central  departments, 
though  with  the  proposed  transfer  of  its  functions  not 
connected  with  the  public  health  to  other  departments 
it  will  lose  in  relative  importance.  Most  of  the  powers 
of  the  new  Ministry  of  Health  as  an  organ  of  central 
administrative  supervision  and  control  have  already  been 
enumerated  in  the  discussion  of  the  powers  and  activities 
of  the  local  areas  and  need,  therefore,  be  only  briefly 
classified  here.  They  fall  conveniently  into  five  groups 
as  follows :  legislative,  advisory,  reporting,  administra- 
tive, and  financial. 

Under  the  head  of  legislative  powers  fall  the  issuance 
of  orders,  rules,  and  regulations,  particularly  plenary  in 
regard  to  poor  relief  and  public  health,  subject  to  disal- 
lowance by  Parliament,  the  King  in  Council,  or,  in  case 
of  excess  of  powers,  by  the  courts.  The  Ministry  of 
Health  has  also  large  powers  over  local  boundaries  and 
the  creation  of  new  areas,  especially  as  regards  parishes, 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  33 

poor-law  unions,  and  county  districts.  In  a  negative 
way  it  can  disallow  or  amend  local  by-laws  relating  to 
poor  relief  and  public  health  matters,  and  in  this  con- 
nection it  prepares  model  ordinances  which  the  local  au- 
thorities find  it  expedient  to  adopt  in  order  to  avoid  all 
questions  of  validity. 

Under  the  head  of  advisory  powers  the  central  author- 
ities offer  advice,  solicited  or  unsolicited,  to  the  local  au- 
thorities, who  find  the  expert  services  of  the  staff  main- 
tained by  the  central  department  extremely  helpful.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  department  renders  advice  to  Parlia- 
ment on  matters  of  local  legislation,  particularly  in  regard 
to  private  bill  legislation  when  the  local  areas  seek  special 
powers  from  Parliament  to  undertake  activities  which  the 
department  has  no  power  to  authorize,  or  on  which  it 
has  not  been  consulted  if  within  its  powers  of  issuing 
provisional  orders. 

Of  considerable  importance  are  the  powers  of  the  de- 
partment to  require  and  to  publish  reports  dealing  with 
all  phases  of  activity  of  the  local  areas,  which,  compiled 
in  the  annual  reports,  constitute  a  mine  of  information 
for  the  study  of  local  government. 

Under  the  head  of  administrative  powers  fall  the 
powers  of  the  central  department  to  compel  action  by  the 
local  authorities,  especially  in  the  fields  of  poor  relief  and 
sanitation,  making  its  comprehensive  powers  of  inspec- 
tion and  supervision  effective. 

Finally,  under  the  head  of  financial  powers  fall  the 
powers  already  noted  of  approving  every  proposal  for  a 
loan  by  the  local  authorities,  including  the  specification 
of  conditions  of  interest  and  repayment,  and  the  power 
of  audit,  involving  the  right  of  disallowance  of  improper 
expenditures  which  the  department  exercises  over  all 
local  expenditures  except  those  of  the  boroughs.     This 


34  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

power  although,  or  perhaps  because,  one  of  the  most  ef- 
fective of  the  powers  of  control  is  perhaps  the  one  which 
has  aroused  the  greatest  feeling  of  opposition  on  the  part 
of  the  local  authorities  to  the  central  department.  Its 
extension  to  the  boroughs,  although  repeatedly  contemp- 
lated, has  aroused  the  strongest  and  so  far  the  successful 
opposition  of  those  authorities. 

These  powers,  which  to  a  more  limited  extent  are  ac- 
corded also  to  the  other  central  departments  within  their 
jurisdiction,  are  exercised  under  the  general  direction  of  a 
Cabinet  Minister  and  his  parliamentary  secretary  and 
under  the  immediate  direction  of  a  permanent  secretary 
aided  by  a  large  staff  of  permanent  expert  officials.  This 
is  in  accordance  with  the  general  plan  of  public  adminis- 
tration found  under  the  English  system  of  parliamentary 
government,  the  so-called  boards  being  boards  in  name 
only,  the  responsibility  centering  in  the  Cabinet  official 
who  alone  has  adequate  powers  of  action,  subject,  of 
course,  to  the  ultimate  direction  of  the  Premier. 

Before  summarizing  very  briefly  the  chief  features  of 
the  English  system  of  local  government  as  outlined  in 
the  preceding  pages  it  is  necessary  to  point  out  that  the 
system  of  central  administrative  supervision  and  control 
over  local  authorities  is  supplemented  by  a  judicial  con- 
trol and  a  legislative  control.  Under  the  English  system 
of  law,  public  officers  of  whatever  position  are  subject 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  civil  and  criminal 
courts  and  may  be  sued  or  prosecuted  for  illegal 
acts  like  any  other  citizen.  Furthermore  the  special 
writs  of  quo  warranto,  certiorari,  mandamus,  etc., 
are  available  to  call  their  acts  into  question  in  the  regular 
courts  and  to  insure  their  conformity  with  the  laws, 
safe-guards  which  in  the  main  will  be  found  to  exist  in 
the  United  States  also. 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  35 

The  legislative  control  is  manifested  as  a  result  of  the 
principle  that  all  of  these  local  units,  which  are  public 
corporations,  are  corporations  of  special,  not  general 
powers  and  that  they  can  act  only  under  specific  author- 
ity granted  by  Parliament  either  by  acts  of  general  ap- 
plication, mandatory  or  permissive  in  nature,  ap- 
plying immediately  to  the  local  areas,  or  through 
provisional  orders  of  the  central  departments,  or  by 
special  acts  secured  under  private  bill  legislation.  This 
process  of  private  bill  legislation,  though  free  from  the 
objections  arising  in  the  experience  of  the  United  States 
with  special  acts  of  the  legislature,  is  expensive  and  dila- 
tory and  tends  to  overload  the  already  overburdened  Par- 
liament with  matters  of  local  concern. 

Summary  of  English  Local  Government. — We  are 
now  in  a  position  to  summarize  the  main  characteristics  of 
the  English  system  of  local  government  and  to  mention 
briefly  some  of  the  directions  in  which  reform  is  being  agi- 
tated. The  English  system  then  is  characterized  by  the 
principle  of  a  large  amount  of  local  self-government  in  at 
least  six  different  kinds  of  units  5  some  of  which,  like 
the  parishes,  the  boroughs,  and  the  counties,  are  histor- 
ical subdivisions,  others  like  the  poor-law  unions  and 
the  two  kinds  of  county  districts  are  artificial  districts, 
all  of  which,  with  the  exception  of  the  poor-law  units, 
are  areas  for  general  administrative  purposes.  The 
areas  are  all  public  corporations  of  delegated  and  spe- 
cific, though  broad  powers.  These  powers  are  exercised, 
save  in  the  case  of  the  smallest  parishes,  by  a  repre- 

5  This  description  of  the  English  system  of  local  government  does 
not  apply  to  the  metropolis  of  London  which  is  governed  under  a 
plan  provided  by  special  legislation.  Although  by  no  means  without 
interest  for  the  student  of  comparative  local  government,  its  ex- 
ceptional nature  prevents  its  being  considered  in  a  brief  general 
summary  such  as  is  attempted  here. 


36  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

sentative  council  elected  on  a  democratic  franchise  in- 
cluding women,  and  composed  of  unpaid  members,  who 
select  the  administrative  officers  to  carry  on  the  actual 
work  of  administration  under  the  direction  of  the  council 
committees.  The  functions  of  the  local  areas  are  carried 
on  under  the  supervision  and  control  of  various  nationall 
administrative  departments,  a  supervision  and  control 
which  have  been  increasing  steadily  during  the  last  hun- 
dred years,  and  which  are  inversely  proportioned  to  the 
importance  of  the  area  and  are  relatively  greater  over  the 
rural  areas  than  over  the  urban  units.  All  these  func- 
tions, both  of  the  subordinate  areas  and  of  the  organs  of 
administrative  supervision  and  control,  are  subject  to 
the  plenary  power  of  Parliament  which,  by  the  process 
of  private  bill  legislation,  has  not  hesitated  to  break  into 
the  uniformity  of  the  system  as  regards  the  powers  con- 
ferred on  a  particular  class  of  local  government  areas 
by  the  grant  of  special  powers  to  individual  units.  No 
distinction  is  attempted  in  the  English  system  between 
central  and  local  functions,  the  actual  powers  conferred 
upon  the  local  areas  being  determined  by  custom  and  by 
administrative  convenience,  though  the  national  treasury 
assists  the  local  areas  in  the  performance  of  many  of 
their  functions.  Finally,  the  entire  scope  of  activity  of 
the  local  bodies  as  well  as  of  the  central  authorities  is 
subject  to  the  judicial  control  of  the  ordinary  courts. 

Among  the  features  of  the  English  system  which  have 
been  criticized  and  made  the  subject  of  proposed  reforms 
may  be  mentioned  first  the  unnecessary  multiplicity  and 
confusion  of  areas.  The  parish,  even  as  reconstituted 
by  the  Local  Government  Act  of  1888,  has  proved  itself 
too  small  and  financially  too  weak  an  area  to  accomplish 
the  desired  purposes  and  it  is  thought  that  the  county 
districts  and  boroughs  could  well  perform  the  functions 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  37 

entrusted  to  the  parish.  Furthermore,  the  poor-law 
unions  needlessly  complicate  the  system  as  they  are  vir- 
tually the  only  remaining  ad  hoc  authorities,  of  which 
there  were  so  many  during  most  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. Even  now  their  boundaries  cut  across  district  and 
even  county  lines,  and  it  would  seem  that  their  functions 
might  well  be  entrusted  to  the  county  districts,  especially 
as  in  the  rural  districts  the  rural  district  councilors  do 
now  act  also  as  guardians  of  the  poor.  As  regards  the 
method  of  central  administrative  control  the  scattering  of 
this  function  among  five  or  six  different  departments 
has  been  felt  to  be  a  weakness.  But  the  establishment  of 
the  Ministry  of  Health  to  supersede  the  Local  Govern- 
ment Board  would  seem  to  mark  a  still  further  develop- 
ment in  that  direction,  since  the  Local  Government 
Board  had  been  gradually  acquiring  more  and  more  of 
the  functions  of  central  control  over  local  administra- 
tion, while  the  Ministry  of  Health  is  to  be  relieved  of  all 
those  functions  formerly  entrusted  to  the  Local  Govern- 
ment Board  which  do  not  relate  to  public  health  and  san- 
itation. Finally,  it  has  been  suggested  as  a  means  of 
diminishing  the  pressure  upon  Parliament  for  local  leg- 
islation that  the  counties  might  be  constituted  units  of 
local  self-government  with  general  powers  for  the  man- 
agement of  county  affairs  and  the  supervision  of  the 
subordinate  divisions. 

Local  Government  in  France  e 

The  Origin  and  Development  of  Local  Government 
in  France. — If  we  should  commence  our  survey  of  the 
history  of  local  administration  in  France  at  the  same  rela- 
tive point  as  the  one  chosen  for  the  point  of  departure 

6  Among  the  host  of  works  in  French  dealing  with  the  administra- 
tive system  in  France  may  be  mentioned  H.  Bertheletny,  Traite  de 


38  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

in  the  consideration  of  English  local  government  devel- 
opment, namely,  the  establishment  of  a  central  power  over 
the  territories  now  comprised  within  the  state,  it  would 
not  be  necessary  to  begin  so  far  back  in  history.  In 
England,  as  we  have  seen,  the  unification  of  the  territor- 
ies under  one  monarch  was  completed  before  the  end  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  period  and  a  definite  system  of  local 
administration  also  existed.  In  France,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  supremacy  of  the  king  was  not  definitely  es- 
tablished until  at  a  much  later  period  and  nothing  ap- 
proaching a  uniform  system  of  local  administration  for 
the  nation  as  a  whole  came  into  being  until  the  period 
of  absolutism  of  the  Bourbon  monarchy  reached  its  zenith 
under  Louis  XIV. 

Urban  institutions  did,  it  is  true,  show  in  some  measure 
a  continuous  history  within  the  present  confines  of  France 
from  the  times  of  the  Roman  Empire,  for  some  of  the 
cities  of  Gaul  had  been  important  urban  centers  and 
survived,  though  in  much  diminished  importance,  the 
Dark  Ages  following  the  migrations  of  the  barbarians 
and  the  fall  of  Rome.  A  considerable  measure  of  local 
autonomy  was  accorded  to  these  cities  by  Rome  under 

droit  administratif,  6th  ed.  (Paris,  1910)  ;  A.  Esmain,  Histoire  du 
droit  francaxs,  8th  ed.  (Paris,  1908)  ;  M.  Block,  Dictionaire  de  I' ad- 
ministration francaise,  5th  ed.  (Paris,  1905)  ;  and,  with  special  refer- 
ence to  the  administration  of  the  communes,  L.  Morgand,  La  loi 
municipale,  7th  ed.   (Paris,  1907). 

The  literature  in  English  on  the  subject  of  local  administration  in 
France  is  unfortunately  very  restricted,  consisting  chiefly  of  brief 
treatments  found  in  works  dealing  with  larger  subjects.  Among 
older  works  may  be  mentioned  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administra- 
tive Law  (New  York,  1893),  Vol.  I,  Book  III,  Chap,  vi,  and  Vol.  II, 
Book  VI,  Division  II,  Chap.  vi.  More  recent  treatments  will  be 
found  in  Ashley,  Local  and  Central  Government  (London,  1906). 
Chaps,  ii  and  vi;  and,  as  regards  the  administration  of  communes, 
Munro,  The  Government  of  European  Cities  (New  York,  1909), 
Chap.  i. 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  39 

the  early  Empire  but  in  its  last  period  their  independence 
was  curtailed  and  their  administration  generally  turned 
over  to  the  clergy. 

With  the  revival  of  city  life  in  Europe  that  began  in 
the  eleventh  century  a  number  of  the  cities  of  France 
succeeded  in  emancipating  themselves  from  the  feudal 
system  that  had  spread  over  Western  Europe  and  at- 
tained for  a  time  a  position  of  virtual  independence, 
while  the  rural  sections  of  the  country  were  in  the  con- 
trol of  the  nobility  and  clergy  under  feudal  institutions. 
In  the  struggle  between  the  Crown  on  the  one  hand  and 
the  feudal  nobility  and  higher  clergy  on  the  other  many 
of  these  cities  secured  from  the  Crown  important  rights 
of  local  self-government  as  the  price  of  the  aid  they 
rendered  the  king,  and  in  1302  the  towns  were  invited 
to  send  representatives  to  the  Estates  General.  But  this 
position  of  independence  was  not  to  continue  beyond  the 
time  when  the  monarchy,  having  reduced  the  power  of 
the  nobles  and  the  clergy,  became  absolute  and  was  able 
in  turn  to  deprive  the  towns  of  their  long  established 
rights  of  self-government. 

From  the  time  of  Louis  the  XIV  until  the  Revolution 
of  1789  then,  the  people  of  France  in  town  and  country 
alike  were  subject  to  an  administrative  system  which  rec- 
ognized virtually  no  powers  of  local  self-government,  but 
rather  imposed  burdensome  duties  enforced  by  officers 
of  the  monarchy.  These  officers  were  the  intendants  and 
sub-delegates  who  knew  no  responsibility  except  to  the 
king.  The  local  offices,  urban  and  parochial,  formerly 
elective,  became  hereditary  and  subject  to  purchase  and 
sale,  and  were  under  the  minute  direction  of  the  agents 
of  the  central  government.  There  was,  therefore,  at  the 
period  just  before  the  Revolution  no  tradition  of  local 
self-government  and  no  experience  on  the  part  of  the 


4o  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

people  in  the  management  even  of  the  simple  affairs  of 
their  localities.  It  is  true  that  even  throughout  the  Bour- 
bon absolutism  a  small  number  of  provinces  retained 
some  of  their  former  governmental  powers  which  they 
exercised  through  their  local  estates  or  assemblies,  but 
these  powers  referred  chiefly  to  the  matter  of  assessing 
and  collecting  the  royal  taxes  which  the  province  was 
required  to  pay.  Police  administration  even  in  these 
more  favored  territories  was  completely  under  royal  con- 
trol. 

So  complete  was  the  change  inaugurated  by  the  Con- 
stituent Assembly  of  1789  in  the  system  of  local  adminis- 
tration that  it  constituted  a  break  in  the  continuity  of 
local  institutions  much  more  pronounced  than  ever  oc- 
curred in  England.  The  existing  territorial  and  govern- 
mental districts,  comprising  some  thirty-four  provinces, 
some  sixty  intendancies,  and  three  hundred  municipalities, 
were  abolished  and  France  was  divided  into  eighty-six  de- 
partments which  were  purely  artificial  divisions  cutting 
across  and  into  the  old  provinces  whose  sectionalism 
it  was  desired  to  destroy.  The  departments  were  sub- 
divided into  districts,  and  as  the  lowest  units  of  govern- 
ment there  were  created,  in  place  of  the  hamlets,  villages, 
towns,  and  cities,  some  forty-four  thousand  communes 
covering  the  whole  of  France.  This  symmetrical  and 
uniform  division  of  the  territory  of  France  into  local 
government  areas  has  continued  through  all  the  inter- 
vening political  and  governmental  changes  down  to  the 
present  day. 

The  uniformity  of  the  Revolutionary  scheme  of  local 
government  is,  however,  the  only  feature  that  did 
prove  lasting.  The  other  two  striking  characteristics  of 
the  system  established  in  1789  were  local  democracy  and 
the  absence  of  central  control.     Each  of  the  local  areas 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  41 

was  to  be  governed  by  an  elective  council  chosen  on  a 
broadly  democratic  franchise  and  quite  free  from  central 
control  over  the  local  affairs,  which  were  fully  entrusted 
to  the  local  bodies.  Both  of  these  features,  especially  in 
conjunction,  proved  unworkable.  The  people  as  a 
whole  were  utterly  without  experience  in  governmental 
matters  and  the  distracted  nature  of  the  times  required 
an  increased  rather  than  a  diminished  measure  of  central 
control  over  the  localities  in  the  interests  of  law  and 
order.  The  Convention  attempted  to  supervise  the  lo- 
calities through  its  own  agents,  but  the  effort  was  without 
success. 

Accordingly  when  the  Directory  came  into  power  in 
1795  another  sweeping  change  was  made  in  the  system 
of  local  government.  The  departmental  districts  were 
abolished,  a  new  division,  the  canton,  supplanted  the 
commune,  and  small  directories  replaced  the  councils  in 
the  departments  and  cantons.  These  directories  were 
subject  to  suspension  and  dismissal  by  the  central  author- 
ities who  appointed  representatives  to  supervise  the  local 
administration,  which  thus  became  again  highly  cen- 
tralized. 

Napoleon  as  First  Consul  and  Emperor  carried  on  this 
development.  The  departments  were,  it  is  true,  again 
subdivided  into  districts,  called  arrondissements,  and  the 
communes  were  again  made  the  ultimate  units  of  local 
government  instead  of  the  artificial  cantons,  but  all  local 
autonomy  was  destroyed.  The  members  of  the  local 
councils  were  appointed  by  the  central  authorities  and  the 
prefects  in  the  departments,  the  sub-prefects  in  the  ar- 
rondissements, and  the  mayors  in  the  communes  were 
the  immediate  appointees  of  Napoleon  who  thus  kept 
in  his  own  hands  the  most  extensive  direction  of  local 
affairs.     Under  the   Napoleonic  system,  therefore,  uni- 


42  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

formity  was  retained,  local  democracy  was  abolished,  and 
strict  central  control  was  assured.  Although  the  ten- 
dency throughout  the  numerous  political  oscillations  of 
the  next  seventy  years  was,  with  some  notable  setbacks, 
especially  under  the  Second  Empire,  in  the  direction  of 
an  increasing  measure  of  democracy  in  the  constitution  of 
the  local  governmental  organs,  uniformity  and  strict 
central  control  were  so  indelibly  stamped  upon  the 
French  system  by  Napoleon,  that  in  those  respects  the 
system  in  republican  France  to-day  is  essentially  that 
under  the  First  Empire. 

Another  feature  of  the  administrative  system  of  the 
Revolution,  confirmed  and  strengthened  by  Napoleon, 
which  has  served  to  distinguish  the  French,  and  as  a  re- 
sult the  whole  continental  system,  from  that  found  in 
the  countries  having  the  English  Common  Law  as  the 
basis  of  their  jurisprudence,  is  the  plan  of  special  admin- 
istrative courts  to  decide  controversies  between  the  indi- 
vidual and  the  administration  as  well  as  questions  arising 
wholly  within  the  administration  itself.  This  indepen- 
dence of  the  administration  from  the  ordinary  judicial 
tribunals  seemed  to  be  demanded  by  the  theories  of  the 
separation  of  powers  which  played  so  prominent  a  part  in 
the  political  philosophy  of  the  times.  Under  the  Bour- 
bon monarchy  in  its  latter  days  the  attempts  of  the  royal 
ministers  to  introduce  reforms  were  frequently  frustrated 
by  the  action  of  the  parliaments  or  regular  courts  which  in 
France  had  not,  as  they  had  in  England,  become  subord- 
inate to  the  Crown.  The  experience  of  France  with  the 
interference  of  the  regular  courts  in  administrative  ques- 
tions was,  therefore,  one  which  led  them  to  free  the  ad- 
ministration from  the  control  of  the  ordinary  courts  in  the 
new  governmental  system.  But  in  order  to  safe-guard 
the  rights  and  interests  of  the  individual  over  against  the 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  43 

administration,  special  administrative  tribunals  or  courts 
were  created,  comprising  persons  who  though  legally 
under  the  control  of  the  chief  administrative  officers  were 
not  themselves  immediately  engaged  in  the  active  ad- 
ministration. This  system  of  administrative  courts  has 
continued  down  to  the  present  and  will  be  referred  to 
briefly  a  little  later  on. 

It  will  not  be  possible  in  this  brief  survey  to  trace  in 
detail  the  various  changes  that  were  brought  about  in 
local  government  under  the  different  regimes  that  fol- 
lowed ;  the  restored  Bourbon  monarchy,  the  Orleanist 
monarchy  of  Louis  Philippe,  the  short  lived  Second  Re- 
public of  1848,  and  the  Second  Empire  of  Louis  Napo- 
leon. These  changes  reflected  to  a  degree  the  liberal 
tendencies  and  the  reactions  that  marked  the  fluctuations 
of  the  central  government.  It  is  sufficient  to  point  out 
that  when  the  Third  Republic  was  finally  established 
firmly,  there  were  no  units  of  local  government  in  France, 
whether  urban  or  rural,  that  had  behind  them  any  con- 
tinuing traditions  of  local  democracy  or  autonomy  on 
which  an  essentially  decentralized  system  like  that  of 
England  could  safely  be  built. 

As  a  general  proposition  it  may  be  stated  that  the 
Third  Republic  not  merely  inherited  the  administrative 
system  established  by  Napoleon  in  the  law  of  28  plu- 
viose,  an  VIII  (1800)  but  has  retained  it  in  most  of  its 
essential  characteristics.  A  greater  measure  of  local  par- 
ticipation has,  it  is  true,  been  introduced,  particularly  in 
the  laws  of  August  10,  1871,  and  of  April  5,  1884,  the 
former  referring  to  the  departments  and  the  latter  to  the 
communes,  determining  the  composition  and  powers  of 
the  local  governing  bodies  in  these  units  of  local  govern- 
ment. Later  laws  and  decrees  have  also  modified  the 
system   in  some  particulars,   but  the  strict  measure  of 


44  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

central  administrative  control  remains  essentially  the 
same. 

Present  Characteristics  of  French  Local  Govern- 
ment.—  France  is  divided  to-day  for  purposes  of  general 
local  government  into  eighty-six  departments,  362  ar- 
rondissements,  and  more  than  thirty-six  thousand  com- 
munes, the  number  of  the  last  named  having  been 
reduced  from  forty-four  thousand  by  the  Napoleonic 
legislation.  In  addition  there  are  some  three  thousand 
cantons,  made  up  of  groups  of  communes,  which  are 
now  only  judicial  and  election  districts,  and  various  larger 
districts  made  up  of  groups  of  departments  for  special 
purposes  such  as  judicial,  military,  educational,  police, 
and  forestry  administration. 

The  Department. —  There  are,  as  has  been  said, 
eighty-six  departments  in  France,  which,  although  arbi- 
trary divisions  constituted  by  the  Revolutionary  govern- 
ment for  convenience  of  administration,  vary  greatly  in 
both  area  and  population.  The  Department  of  the  Seine, 
in  which  is  included  Paris,  is  at  the  same  time  the  smallest 
in  area  and  the  largest  in  population.  The  average  area 
of  the  French  department  is  about  twenty- four  hundred 
square  miles  and  the  average  population  not  far  from 
half  a  million.  Both  in  area  and  population,  therefore, 
the  average  French  department  is  a  more  considerable  di- 
vision than  is  the  average  English  county.  In  spite  of 
the  fact  that  at  the  time  of  its  formation  the  department 
consciously  violated  natural  geographical  and  historical 
divisions  it  has  inevitably  developed  in  its  century  and 
a  quarter  of  existence  a  certain  social  consciousness  of 
common  interests  among  its  inhabitants.  This  has  de- 
veloped in  spite  of  the  limited  participation  of  those  in- 
habitants in  governmental  affairs  until  the  legislation  of 
the  Third  Republic  conferred  upon  it  the  character  of  a 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  45 

public  corporation  with  certain  powers  of  local  self-gov- 
ernment, in  addition  to  its  character  as  an  area  for  state 
administration.  In  the  clear  distinction  made  in  France 
between  central  affairs  and  local  affairs  we  find  another 
feature  that  distinguishes  the  French,  or  continental,  sys- 
tem of  administration  from  the  English. 

It  is  this  dual  nature  of  the  French  department  which 
determines  the  composition  and  powers  of  the  govern- 
mental organs  found  therein.  As  an  area  for  state  ad- 
ministration the  department  has  as  local  agents  of  the 
central  government  the  prefect  and  the  prefectoral  council. 
As  an  area  for  local  self-government  the  department  is 
provided  with  a  representative  assembly  called  the  gen- 
eral council,  and  a  supervising  committee  of  that  as- 
sembly called  the  departmental  commission.  The  ex- 
ecutive head  of  the  local  government  corporation  is  the 
prefect,  who  thus  unites  in  himself  the  dual  character  of 
a  representative  of  the  central  government  for  purposes 
of  state  administration  and  of  head  of  the  area  of  local 
self-government. 

Considering  the  department  first  as  a  local  govern- 
ment corporation  we  find  that  the  general  council  of  the 
department  consists  of  a  number  of  councilors,  varying 
from  seventeen  to  sixty-seven,  elected  one  from  each 
canton  in  the  department  on  the  basis  of  universal  man- 
hood suffrage  for  a  period  of  six  years,  one-half  retiring 
every  third  year.  The  council  is  a  body  of  specified,  as 
distinguished  from  general,  powers,  in  which  respect  it  is 
like  the  councils  of  the  English  local  government  areas 
and  unlike  the  councils  of  the  communes,  as  will  be  seen 
later.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  council  is  quite  extensive. 
It  has  charge  of  all  departmental  property;  has  control 
of  the  departmental  highways,  that  is,  those  which  are 
neither  sectors  of  the  national  highways  nor  the  minor 


46  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

roads  entrusted  to  the  communes;  maintains  normal 
schools,  orphan  and  lunatic  asylums ;  and  exercises  a 
certain  control  over  the  communes  in  regard  to  changes 
of  boundaries,  markets  and  fairs,  customs,  taxes,  and 
the  distribution  of  state  grants  for  charitable,  educa- 
tional, and  agricultural  purposes.  The  departmental  cor- 
poration secures  its  funds  from  the  income  of  its 
property,  state  grants,  and  a  local  direct  tax,  superim- 
posed, within  a  defined  maximum,  upon  the  state  taxes. 
For  permanent  improvements  the  council  may  issue  loans 
limited  in  terms  to  thirty  years  unless  authorized  by 
special  law  for  a  longer  period. 

In  the  exercise  of  its  various  powers  the  independence 
of  the  council  shows  a  marked  variation,  graduated  from 
a  mere  power  to  give  advice  to  the  central  authorities 
on  matters  affecting  the  department,  advice,  which 
though  prerequisite  in  certain  cases  to  action  by  the 
higher  authorities  need  not  be  followed,  to  powers  of 
independent  action  not  subject  to  higher  approval.  Be- 
tween these  two  extremes  are  those  powers  which  stand 
as  exercised  unless  annulled  within  three  months  by  a 
decree  of  the  central  government  setting  forth  the  rea- 
sons for  the  action,  and  those  powers,  chiefly  in  regard 
to  finances,  which  need  the  express  approval  of  the  min- 
istry before  they  can  be  exercised.  Finally  may  be  noted 
a  function  exercised  by  the  council  which  does  not  relate 
to  local  administration,  namely  that  of  participating  in 
the  electoral  college  which  chooses  the  national  senators 
from  the  department.  The  councilors  are  unpaid  and 
choose  their  own  officers. 

The  general  council  of  the  department  meets  in  regular 
session  only  twice  a  year,  once  in  the  spring  and  again 
in  August,  the  first  session  being  limited  to  two  weeks, 
the  second  to  one  month.     Although  the  council  may 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  47 

meet  in  special  session  on  call  of  the  central  authorities 
or  of  two-thirds  of  the  council,  the  inconvenience  of 
getting  it  together  interferes  with  frequent  sessions  and 
the  law,  therefore,  provides  for  a  smaller  body  known 
as  the  departmental  commission  to  which  the  council 
may  entrust  any  of  its  duties  except  those  relating  to 
the  levying  of  taxes  and  the  making  of  loans.  This  de- 
partmental commission  consists  of  from  four  to  seven 
members,  elected  by  the  council  for  the  period  of  a  year, 
who  also  serve  without  pay. 

The  chief  function  of  the  commission,  indeed  the  rea- 
son for  its  creation,  is  to  be  found  in  the  supervision  and 
control  it  exercises  over  the  prefect  in  that  part  of  his 
dual  functions  which  deal  with  the  administrative  affairs 
of  the  departmental  corporation.  In  his  capacity  as 
administrative  head  of  the  local  government  corporation 
the  prefect  is  subject  to  the  continuous  supervision  of 
this  commission  which  meets  regularly  each  month  and 
oftener  when  required.  The  commission  audits  the  ac- 
counts of  the  prefect,  examines  and  reports  to  the  council 
on  the  prefect's  budget  proposals,  inventories  the  depart- 
mental property  administered  by  the  prefect,  and  ap- 
proves the  execution  of  contracts  and  the  bringing  or 
defending  of  suits  proposed  by  the  prefect. 

Aside  from  these  supervisory  duties  the  commission 
directly  performs  some  of  the  functions  formerly  en- 
trusted to  the  prefect,  for  instance,  with  regard  to  the 
priority  of  public  works  and  the  issuance  of  loans.  It 
also  regularly  appoints  members  of  semi-public  commis- 
sions financially  aided  by  the  department,  and  takes  part 
in  highway  and  tax  administration. 

The  prefect,  as  has  been  seen,  acts,  in  one  capacity,  as 
the  executive  head  of  the  local  government  corporation. 
As  such  he  appoints  and  dismisses  all  officers  in  the  de- 


48  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

partmental  service,  issues  all  orders  for  payment  on  the 
department  treasury,  prepares  the  departmental  budget, 
supervises  public  works,  and  executes  all  determinations 
of  the  general  council.  In  the  performance  of  this  side 
of  his  official  duties  the  prefect  is,  it  is  true,  controlled 
by  the  general  council  and  its  departmental  commission; 
nevertheless  his  real  responsibility  is  even  here  deter- 
mined rather  by  his  relation  to  the  central  government. 
He  is  appointed  by  the  President  on  nomination  of  the 
Minister  of  the  Interior,  is  absolutely  responsible  to  the 
same  power,  by  which  he  also  can  be  dismissed,  and  is 
subject  at  all  times  to  be  transferred  to  another  depart- 
ment. Indeed  in  his  dealings  with  the  department  as  a 
local  government  corporation  the  prefect  is  kept  in  har- 
mony with  local  sentiment  rather  through  the  round-about 
and  indirect  influence  which  the  deputies  from  the  de- 
partment can  exert  on  the  ministry  and  reflecting  from 
them  on  the  prefect,  than  on  the  immediate  control  en- 
trusted  to   the  council   and   commission. 

The  prefect  is  a  highly  paid  official  who,  although  a 
political  appointee  and  not  required  by  law  to  have  any 
technical  or  professional  qualifications  for  his  post,  does 
usually  bring  to  it  a  more  or  less  extended  experience  in 
the  field  of  public  administration.  His  more  important 
function  to-day,  as  it  was  originally  his  only  one,  is  to 
represent  the  central  government  in  the  territory  com- 
prised within  the  department.  As  such  the  prefect  puts 
into  effect  within  his  department  the  decrees  of  the  min- 
isters; he  exercises  the  appointing  and  removal  power 
over  a  vast  number  of  subordinate  national  employees  in 
the  field  of  postal  administration,  primary  education, 
taxation,  and  national  highways;  he  has  a  considerable 
measure  of  police  ordinance  power  in  its  broader  sense; 
he    represents    the    national    government    in    suits;    and 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  49 

finally,  and  among  the  most  important  of  his  functions 
from  the  point  of  view  of  this  survey,  he  exercises  a 
large  measure  of  control  over  the  communes  in  his  de- 
partment. This  last  function,  which  he  exercises  as 
agent  of  the  ministers,  includes  such  fundamental  powers 
as  the  suspension  of  the  councilors  and  mayors,  the  ap- 
proval of  the  communal  budgets  for  the  purpose  of  in- 
suring the  insertion  of  the  obligatory  items,  the  annul- 
ment of  ordinances  issued  by  the  mayors,  the  approval 
of  appointments  by  the  mayor  to  many  of  the  higher 
positions  in  the  police  force,  the  approval  of  loans  by 
the  commune,  the  use  directly  or  indirectly  of  depart- 
mental or  national  highways  within  the  commune,  the 
disposition,  in  any  manner,  of  communal  property,  and 
other  less  important  matters.  In  all  of  these  directions 
his  actions  are  subject  to  the  control  of  the  ministers  and 
to  the  review  of  the  supreme  administrative  court,  the 
Council  of  State,  when  it  is  alleged  that  his  powers  have 
been  used  illegally. 

Extra-legally  the  prefect  is  also  the  political  agent  of 
the  administration  and  as  such  takes  an  active  part  in  the 
elections  within  his  department.  This  function,  which  is 
also  a  survival  of  earlier  times,  is  the  cause  of  a  good  deal 
of  the  opposition  which  has  been  directed  against  the 
prefect,  especially  in  recent  years.  Being  the  agent  of 
a  ministry  whose  tenure  of  office  depends  on  retaining 
a  majority  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  it  is  almost  in- 
evitable that  he  should  be  expected  by  that  ministry  to 
aid  the  government  majority  in  the  elections  in  his  de- 
partment. 

Beside  the  prefect  there  is  another  governmental 
agency  for  purposes  of  state  administration  within  the 
department  known  as  the  prefectoral  council.  This  con- 
sists of  three  or  four  members  appointed  and  dismissed 


50  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

by  the  President  on  nomination  of  the  Minister  of  the 
Interior.  They  must  be  trained  in  the  law  or  in  adminis- 
tration and  although  receiving  but  a  small  salary  they 
must  devote  their  whole  time  to  this  work.  The  council 
has  three  classes  of  functions.  It  acts  as  an  advisory 
body,  as  an  administrative  board,  and  as  an  administra- 
tive court.  When  acting  in  either  of  the  first  two  ca- 
pacities the  council  is  presided  over  by  the  prefect. 
When  sitting  as  an  administrative  court,  however,  a  vice- 
president  usually  presides.  As  an  advisory  body  the 
council  must  be  consulted  by  the  prefect  on  many  of  his 
important  functions  as  agent  of  the  central  government, 
but  it  is  important  to  note  that  he  is  not  in  any  way 
bound  to  follow  such  advice.  As  an  administrative 
board  the  council  examines  the  accounts  of  the  collectors 
of  local  taxes  and  gives  approval  to  the  communes  and 
some  of  the  departmental  institutions  to  institute  legal 
proceedings. 

The  third  function  of  the  prefectoral  council,  that  of 
sitting  as  the  administrative  court  of  first  instance,  con- 
stitutes its  most  important  function.  It  has  already  been 
pointed  out  that  one  of  the  distinguishing  features  of  the 
French  administrative  system  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact 
that  controversies  between  the  administration,  national 
or  local,  and  individuals  or  corporations  who  feel  them- 
selves aggrieved  or  injured  by  the  action  of  the  adminis- 
tration are  not  ordinarily  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  regular  courts  but  are  brought  before  special  tribu- 
nals known  as  administrative  courts.  The  prefectoral 
councils  constitute  the  courts  of  first  instance  for  matters 
arising  in  the  general  administration,  there  being,  how- 
ever, special  courts  for  controversies  arising  in  the  field 
of  educational  administration  and  the  administration  of 
the  compulsory  military  service.     Appeals  lie  from  the 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  51 

decisions  of  the  prefectoral  councils  to  the  judicial  divi- 
sion of  the  Council  of  State,  the  supreme  administrative 
court,  in  cases  where  individuals  make  complaints 
"  against  those  non-political  acts  of  the  administrative 
authorities  of  special  and  not  general  application,  whose 
immediate  effect  is  to  violate  the  rights  of  individuals 
acquired  by  virtue  of  some  statute,  ordinance,  or  a  con- 
tract." 7  Against  any  acts  of  the  administration  involv- 
ing the  excess  of  powers  a  case  can  be  brought  imme- 
diately before  the  Council  of  State,  which  may  annul 
the  act  complained  of,  while  as  regards  decisions  of 
the  prefectoral  Council  as  an  administrative  court  the 
Council  of  State  has  the  same  freedom  of  going  into 
question  of  fact  and  expediency  and  of  amending  the 
action  complained  of  as  is  accorded  to  the  administrative 
courts  of  the  first  instance. 

The  Arrondissements. —  Below  the  departments  stand 
the  arrondissements  or  districts,  on  an  average  four  to 
a  department.  These,  like  the  departments,  were  arbi- 
trary divisions  established  by  Napoleon  for  strengthen- 
ing the  central  administration.  Unlike  the  departments, 
however,  they  have  remained  areas  for  purposes  of  cen- 
tral administration  only,  are  not  public  corporations, 
have  no  powers  of  local  self-government,  and  are  not 
very  important  even  as  administrative  districts  of  state 
administration.  In  each  district,  except  those  in  which 
the  capitals  of  the  department  are  situated,  there  is  a 
sub-prefect,  who,  although  appointed  and  dismissed  in 
the  same  way  as  the  prefect,  is  entirely  the  creature  of  the 
latter  and  acts  as  his  representative.  He  furnishes  the 
prefect  with  the  necessary  information  relative  to  the 
public  affairs  within  his  district  and  transmits  to  the 
communes  the  acts  and  orders  of  the  prefect.     He,  like 

7  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  Vol.  II,  p.  226. 


52  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  prefect,  devotes  considerable  attention  to  politics  and 
elections  in  his  district. 

There  is,  it  is  true,  a  representative  body  for  the  ar- 
rondissement  elected  in  the  same  manner  as  the  general 
council  of  the  department,  but  it  has  no  powers  of  local 
self-government.  Aside  from  apportioning  among  the 
communes  in  the  district  the  quota  of  direct  taxes  as- 
signed to  it  by  the  general  council  of  the  department,  and 
of  giving  advice  on  matters  of  state  administration  af- 
fecting the  district,  the  only  other  function  of  the  dis- 
trict council  is  to  form  part  of  the  departmental  electoral 
college  for  the  election  of  national  senators. 

The  Cantons. —  The  cantons  can  be  dismissed  with 
but  a  word  in  this  survey  because  they  are  not  units  of 
general  administration  for  either  state  or  local  affairs. 
The  experiment  of  the  Directory  of  1795  in  making  the 
canton,  an  arbitrary  division,  the  ultimate  unit  of  local 
government  in  place  of  the  commune  was  abandoned  by 
Napoleon.  To-day  the  cantons  no  longer  serve  as  elec- 
toral districts  for  the  Deputies,  but  do  so  for  the  general 
council  of  the  department  and  they  are  the  districts  for 
the  inferior  courts  above  the  justices  of  the  peace. 

The  Communes. —  Of  prime  importance  in  the 
French  scheme  of  local  administration  are  the  communes, 
which  were  for  the  most  part  ancient  communities  when 
the  Constituent  Assembly  in  1789  made  them  uniform 
areas  of  local  self-government  on  a  democratic  basis. 
Reduced  to  a  position  of  virtual  dependence  upon  the 
central  government  by  the  Directory  in  consequence  of 
the  unhappy  results  of  decentralization  during  the  period 
of  the  Terror,  and  to  complete  subserviency  by  Napoleon 
as  a  measure  of  insurance  for  the  continuance  of  his  dic- 
tatorship, the  fortunes  of  the  communes  fluctuated  with 
the  changes  in  the  national  government  until  their  pres- 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  53 

ent  status  was  determined  by  the  legislation  of  the  Third 
Republic,  embodied  in  the  Municipal  Code  of  1884  and 
its  subsequent  modifications.  But  the  stamp  of  central 
administrative  control  imposed  upon  the  French  com- 
munes by  the  Napoleonic  regime  still  remains  deeply  im- 
pressed upon  them. 

It  is  to  be  noted  first  of  all,  in  contradistinction  to  the 
English  system,  that  no  distinction  is  made  between  urban 
and  rural  communities,  the  law  of  1884  applying  to  all  the 
thirty-six  thousand  communes  alike,  ranging  from  ham- 
lets of  a  few  houses  to  cities  like  Lyons  and  Marseilles, 
each  with  more  than  half  a  million  of  people.  Paris,  it 
is  true,  like  London,  being  the  capital  and  the  metropolis 
as  well,  is  governed  under  special  laws,  and  some  special 
arrangements  have  been  perfected  for  Lyons.  The  pre- 
dominatingly rural  character  of  these  communes  can  be 
seen  from  the  fact  that  three-fourths  of  the  communes 
have  a  population  of  less  than  a  thousand,  and  nearly 
half  of  the  total  number  have  fewer  inhabitants  than 
five  hundred.  Only  in  the  size  of  the  council  and  in  the 
control  of  the  police  is  any  distinction  made  in  the  Mu- 
nicipal Code  between  the  largest  and  the  smallest  of 
these  communes. 

The  governing  authorities  of  the  commune  are  the 
council,  and  the  mayor  and  ad  joints  chosen  by  the  coun- 
cil. The  council  consists  of  members  elected  by  universal 
manhood  suffrage  for  a  term  of  four  years,  all  coun- 
cilors going  out  of  office  together.  The  size  of  the  coun- 
cil varies  according  to  a  sliding  scale  from  ten  members 
in  communes  with  populations  of  five  hundred  or  less 
to  thirty-six  in  communes  with  over  sixty  thousand  in- 
habitants, except  Lyons  which  has  fifty-four.  In  com- 
munes with  more  than  ten  thousand  inhabitants  the  coun- 
cilors may  be  elected  by  wards,  but  as  each  ward  must 


54  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

return  at  least  four  councilors  there  may  not  be  more 
than  nine  wards  no  matter  what  the  size  of  the  city. 
Elections  are  held  on  Sunday  and,  as  formerly  in  the 
case  of  national  elections,  both  a  majority  of  the  votes 
cast  and  one-fourth  of  the  enrolled  vote  must  be  secured 
by  a  candidate  to  be  successful  in  the  first  elections. 
Supplementary  elections  are  held  to  complete  the  mem- 
bership if  sufficient  candidates  have  not  fulfilled  the  con- 
ditions in  the  first  election,  but  in  these  elections  a  mere 
plurality  suffices  to  elect. 

The  council  is  required  to  have  only  four  regular 
meetings  a  year,  but  special  meetings  may  be  called,  and 
in  the  larger  communes  are  common.  The  first  duty  of 
the  new  council  is  to  elect  a  mayor  and  adjoints,  or  as- 
sistants, the  number  of  which  latter  varies  from  one  to 
twelve  according  to  the  size  of  the  commune,  except 
Lyons  again  which  has  seventeen.  Both  the  mayor  and 
adjoints  must  be  members  of  the  council  but  no  other 
qualifications  are  insisted  upon. 

The  council  in  the  French  commune  differs  from  the 
English  borough  and  district  councils  in  that  it  is  a  de- 
liberative body  only,  the  administrative  functions  being 
entrusted,  under  the  French  theory  of  the  separation  of 
powers,  to  the  mayor  and  adjoints.  On  the  other  hand 
the  communal  council  is  a  body  of  general  powers 
whereas,  as  we  have  seen,  the  English  local  councils  are 
authorities  of  specific  powers.  By  the  terms  of  the 
Municipal  Code  the  communal  council  "  regulates  by  its 
deliberations  the  affairs  of  the  communes."  Under  this 
grant  of  powers  the  council  may  pass  any  measures  af- 
fecting the  commune  which  have  not  been  either  speci- 
fically entrusted  to  other  agencies  or  expressly  denied 
to  the  commune.  The  commune,  therefore,  acts  under 
a  broader  theory  of  local  powers  than  do  the  local  units 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  55 

in  England.  But,  as  will,  be  seen,  the  limitations  im- 
posed on  this  power  by  the  extensive  functions  assigned 
to  the  mayor  and  to  agents  of  the  central  government, 
leave  the  scope  of  powers  of  the  French  communal  coun- 
cil in  point  of  fact  less  extensive  than  those  of  the 
English  borough.  To  this  consideration  must  be  added 
the  fundamental  one  that  even  in  the  exercise  of  the 
powers  left  to  the  commune  the  council  is  subject  to  a 
stricter  control  by  the  central  administrative  authorities 
than  is  the  case  in  England. 

While  in  England,  therefore,  the  Local  Government 
Acts,  Municipal  Corporations  Acts,  and  other  legislation, 
special  and  general,  dealing  with  units  of  local  govern- 
ment enumerate  the  powers  granted  to  localities,  the 
French  Municipal  Code  after  making  a  broad  grant  of 
general  local  powers  to  communes  enumerates  limita- 
tions upon  those  powers.  In  the  first  place  the  council 
has  the  function  generally  accorded  to  local  authorities  in 
France  of  advising  the  central  authorities  on  measures 
affecting  the  locality,  advice  which,  in  accordance  with 
the  French  system,  need  not  be  followed.  On  the  face 
of  it  such  a  power  would  seem  to  be  purely  illusory, 
but  the  fact  that  the  central  authorities,  if  undertaking 
to  act  contrary  to  the  expressed  opinion  of  the  local 
council,  must  answer  to  the  parliamentary  deputies  rep- 
resenting the  locality,  gives  this  power  some  measure  of 
vitality. 

Most  of  the  important  powers  of  the  council,  that  is, 
those  local  powers  which  are  not  assigned  to  the  .mayor 
or  to  agents  of  the  central  government,  are  made  sub- 
ject to  approval  by  the  higher  administrative  authorities, 
that  is,  the  prefects  or  their  representatives,  the  sub- 
prefects,  the  prefectoral  councils,  or  the  ministers  of 
state.     All  proposals   for  the  disposition  of   communal 


56  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

property,  including  streets  and  parks,  require  higher  ap- 
proval. The  communal  budget  must  be  submitted  to  the 
prefect  or  the  President  of  the  Republic  for  approval, 
according  to  the  estimated  income,  who  may  alter  the 
tax  proposals  but  may  not  increase  expenditures  except 
to  provide  for  the  obligatory  items  of  expenditure.  But 
as  the  number  of  these  obligatory  items  is  continually  in- 
creasing without  a  corresponding  increase  in  the  revenues 
of  the  communes  this  feature  of  central  control  is  be- 
coming more  and  more  complete  and  burdensome. 
Loans  for  permanent  improvements,  if  involving  con- 
siderable amounts,  require  the  approval  of  the  central 
authorities,  and  when  it  is  proposed  to  construct  or  ac- 
quire public  utilities,  the  control  of  the  higher  authorities 
has  been  exercised  pretty  consistently  to  prevent  such 
municipal  socialism,  with  the  result  that  even  the  larger 
French  communes  are  a  long  way  behind  English  bor- 
oughs in  the  field  of  municipal  trading.  The  establish- 
ment and  control  of  markets  similarly  require  higher  ap- 
proval and  a  number  of  less  important  powers  are 
circumscribed  in  the  same  way. 

The  communes  derive  their  revenues  from  four  prin- 
cipal sources :  ( i )  franchises,  licenses,  and  the  income 
from  municipal  property;  (2)  certain  state  grants  to 
needy  communes;  (3)  direct  taxes  added  to  the  national 
taxes  within  limits  prescribed  by  general  law  or  author- 
ized by  special  act  of  the  national  legislature;  and  (4) 
the  local  customs,  or  octrois,  levied  upon  food  stuffs  and 
certain  other  materials  brought  into  the  commune. 

Control  over  the  police  is  entrusted  either  to  the  mayor 
under  central  supervision  or  exercised  directly  by  the 
central  authorities,  while  the  control  over  departmental 
and  national  highways,  which  include  the  main  thorough- 
fares in  all  communes  is  also  withdrawn  from  the  control 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  57 

of  the  council.  As  this  latter  control  comprises  the  im- 
portant matter  of  granting  franchises  to  public-service 
corporations  as  well  as  the  use  of  the  streets  by  the 
commune  itself  for  like  purposes,  a  very  important  field  of 
action  is  closed  entirely  to  the  French  communes  which  in 
England  is  left  to  the  boroughs.  This  leaves,  therefore, 
but  a  limited  field  of  action  for  the  commune  to  be  exer- 
cised independently  by  the  council,  especially  as  education 
in  France  is  regarded  as  a  national  function  and  its  ad- 
ministration is  entrusted  to  a  separate  group  of  authori- 
ties. 

Finally,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  certain  matters  are  ex- 
pressly withdrawn  from  the  deliberative  activities  of 
the  council,  such  as  the  discussion  of  national  and  de- 
partmental policies,  while  the  council  itself  may  be  sus- 
pended by  the  prefect  or  dismissed  by  the  President  of 
the  Republic  in  case  it  undertakes  activities  that  are  de- 
nied it  or  fails  to  perform  properly  the  duties  that  are 
imposed  upon  it.  This  power,  it  is  true,  is  an  extreme 
one  and  has  been  rarely  used  under  the  Third  Republic, 
but  its  existence  is  another  of  the  heritages  of  imperialis- 
tic France  which  infringes  upon  the  independence  of  the 
communes. 

The  mayor,  though  appointed  by  the  council  and  act- 
ing with  his  adjoints  as  the  executive  organ  for  the  com- 
mune, is  in  reality  still  an  agent  of  the  central  govern- 
ment for  the  performance  of  many  central  functions 
within  the  commune  under  strict  central  control.  Like 
the  councilors  and  adjoints,  the  mayor  is  unpaid, 
though  the  scope  of  his  duties  is  such  as  to  require  all  of 
his  time.  As  executive  head  of  the  commune  the  mayor 
appoints  and  dismisses  all  communal  employees,  except 
the  treasurer  and  the  commissioner  of  police,  subject  to 
no  legal  restrictions.     He  prepares  the  financial  reports 


58  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  commune,  and  draws  up  and  defends  the  com- 
munal budget  before  the  council.  He  is  administrator 
of  the  communal  property  and  exercises  the  control  over 
the  local  streets.  He  executes  the  ordinances  of  the 
council  and  has  an  independent  ordinance  power  of  his 
own  for  the  preservation  of  public  safety  and  health^, 
within  defined  limits  and  subject  to  the  approval  of  the 
higher  authorities. 

Important  as  are  the  mayor's  powers  as  executive 
head  of  the  local  corporation,  they  are  perhaps  surpassed 
in  extent  and  significance  by  the  powers  he  exercises  as 
agent  of  the  central  government.  In  cities  of  more  than 
forty  thousand  inhabitants  the  control  over  the  municipal 
police  force  entrusted  to  the  mayor  is  in  effect  exercised 
by  him  under  the  most  minute  direction  of  the  central 
government.  Even  in  the  smaller  communes  where  his 
powers  in  this  respect  are  greater  his  appointments  to  the 
more  important  posts  must  receive  the  approval  of  the 
prefect,  while  the  commissioners  of  police  are  appointed 
directly  by  the  national  government.  As  agent  of  the 
central  government,  moreover,  the  mayor  has  charge  of 
the  Hat  civil,  or  civil  register,  performs  the  civil  mar- 
riages, and  makes  the  reports  required  for  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  compulsory  military  service  law,  and  in  time 
of  war  the  mayor's  powers  as  local  agent  of  the  war  de- 
partment become  even  more  extensive.  The  prepara- 
tion of  voters'  lists,  the  administration  of  the  state  taxes, 
and  the  taking  of  the  census  are  also  among  the  matters 
entrusted  to  the  mayor  as  local  agent  of  the  central  gov- 
ernment. Aside  from  the  continuing  supervision  of 
the  central  government  in  all  these  cases,  the  mayor  is 
subject  to  suspension  by  the  prefect  and  dismissal  by  the 
President  for  malfeasance  in  office  or  neglect  of  his  du- 
ties.    The   adjoints   are  merely   his   assistants   without 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  59 

specific  powers  of  their  own,  the  extent  of  their  actual 
functions  depending  on  the  delegation  of  such  secon- 
dary functions  as  the  mayor  may  see  fit  to  entrust  to  them. 

Special  Local  Corporations. —  For  purposes  of  public 
improvements  involving  more  than  one  commune  or 
more  than  one  department,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  es- 
pecially for  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of  ex- 
pensive public  institutions,  the  law  provides  for  the  union 
of  communes  or  departments  into  local  corporations  for 
special  purposes,  but  this  is  a  power  which  has  been 
made  use  of  in  relatively  few  instances. 

Central  Administrative  Departments. —  The  prin- 
cipal central  department  acting  as  controlling  authority 
over  the  agencies  of  local  government  is  the  Ministry  of 
the  Interior.  Under  the  law,  it  is  true,  many  of  the  acts 
of  appointment,  dismissal,  dissolution,  examination  and 
approval,  and  veto  with  regard  to  local  authorities  are 
lodged  in  the  hands  of  the  President  of  the  Republic, 
but  under  the  system  of  parliamentary  government  in 
France,  the  President  performs  these  acts  much  as  the 
King  of  England  performs  his  governmental  acts,  namely 
on  the  proposal  of  the  ministry,  without  the  exercise  of 
discretion  on  his  own  part.  In  a  number  of  cases  in- 
deed the  law  expressly  states  that  the  President  shall  act 
on  the  proposition  of  the  Minister  of  the  Interior.  The 
same  considerations  control  the  relations  of  the  other 
national  departments  that  come  into  contact  with  the  local 
government  authorities,  namely  the  Ministry  of  War, 
the  Ministry  of  Finance,  the  Ministry  of  Public  Works, 
the  Ministry  of  Public  Instruction,  the  Ministry  of  Agri- 
culture, the  Ministry  of  Commerce  and  Industry,  and  the 
Ministry  of  Education.  It  is  not  possible  within  the 
scope  of  this  brief  survey  to  describe  the  other  agencies 
of  national  administration  in  the  field  of  justice,  finance, 


60  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

military,  and  educational  affairs.  It  may  be  worth  while 
to  point  out,  however,  that  for  these  purposes  larger 
administrative  districts  are  employed  consisting  of  groups 
of  departments.  This  fact  is  of  some  significance  in 
connection  with  one  of  the  proposals  for  reform  to  be 
mentioned  below  which  contemplates  the  grouping  of 
departments  into  "  (regions  "  for  purposes  of  general  ad- 
ministration. 

Proposals  for  Reform.8  —  For  twenty-five  years  the 
subject  of  administrative  reform  in  France  has  been  a 
political  as  well  as  an  academic  issue.  Sixty  per  cent  of 
the  deputies  elected  in  19 10  were  pledged  to  administra- 
tive reform  of  some  kind,  while  the  literature  on  the 
subject  during  the  last  twenty  years  has  reached  enor- 
mous proportions.  Briefly  stated,  the  indictment  against 
the  present  system  is  that  it  continues  under  a  republican 
form  of  government  the  imperialistic  administrative 
scheme  of  Napoleon.  Deconcentration  there  has  been 
since  the  establishment  of  the  Third  Republic,  that  is, 
many  functions  have  been  transferred  from  the  ministers 
to  their  representatives  in  the  local  areas.  But  the  bat- 
tle cry  of  the  reformers  is  decentralization.  As  is  usual 
with  reform  programs,  however,  while  the  reformers  are 
pretty  well  agreed  as  to  the  end  desired,  they  are  not  at 
all  agreed  as  to  the  means  which  will  accomplish  that 
end,  and  there  are  almost  as  many  projets,  or  reform 
proposals,  as  there  are  reformers.  These  proposals  range 
all  the  way  from  a  mere  increase  in  the  powers  of  indepen- 
dent action  accorded  to  the  communes  to  plans  for  trans- 
forming France  from  a  unitary  into  a  federal  state  with 

8  An  admirable,  though  brief,  discussion  in  English  of  the  various 
recent  proposals  for  reform  of  the  administrative  system  of  France 
may  be  found  in  Garner,  "  Administrative  Reform  in  France," 
American  Political  Science  Review,  Vol.  XII,  No.  1  (February, 
iqiq),  p.  17.     See  also  Buell,  Contemporary  French  Politics. 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  61 

the  ancient  provinces  reestablished  as  units  within  the 
nation,  having  somewhat  the  same  powers  over  their  in- 
ternal affairs  as  those  which  the  commonwealths  of  the 
United  States  enjoy. 

Criticism  has  been  directed  at  almost  every  feature  of 
the  present  system,  from  the  ministers  who  are  incapable 
of  personally  handling  the  enormous  mass  of  duties  im- 
posed upon  them  with  regard  to  local  administration  and 
who,  consequently,  of  necessity  turn  most  of  these 
functions  over  to  routine-ridden  bureaucrats,  down  to 
the  sub-prefects  who  are  considered  useless,  expensive, 
and  burdensome  officials.  The  communes  are  depicted 
as  operating  under  an  administrative  tutelage  that  leaves 
them  no  freedom  but  stifles  all  local  initiative.  The  pre- 
fectoral  council  is  described  as  ineffective  and  useless 
while  the  prefect  appears  as  a  petty  dictator  concerned 
largely  with  promoting  the  political  interests  of  the  dom- 
inant parties  within  his  department.  The  department  it- 
self, though  established  now  for  a  century  and  a  quarter, 
is  regarded  as  constituting  an  arbitrary  division  with  no 
real  community  of  feeling  which  should  either  be  com- 
bined with  other  departments  into  regional  divisions 
based  on  the  ancient  provincial  divisions  or  be  superseded 
entirely  by  these  provinces  reconstituted  as  units  in  a  fed- 
eral state.  Even  the  system  of  special  administrative 
courts  which  antedates  the  rest  of  the  present  administra- 
tive system  does  not  escape  criticism,  though  foreign 
students  of  that  feature  of  the  French  plan  have  found 
that  individual  rights  and  interests  are  fully  as  well  pro- 
tected as  they  are  in  England  or  America  where  all  of- 
ficers are  subject  in  their  official  actions  to  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  ordinary  courts. 

It  is  impossible  of  course  to  predict  which  of  the  nu- 
merous  proposals   will  finally   be   enacted   into   law   or 


62  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

whether  some  new  suggestions  will  be  adopted,  but  it  is 
safe  to  say  that  some  measure  of  greater  local  self- 
government  will  be  introduced  in  the  near  future  by 
diminishing  somewhat  the  extreme  administrative  cen- 
tralization characteristic  of  the  present  system.  The 
practical  political  advantage  of  centralization,  with  its 
incidental  patronage  to  the  parties  in  control  at  any  given 
time,  makes  them  hesitate  to  inaugurate  the  desired 
changes.  In  England  the  steady  development  dur- 
ing the  last  hundred  years  has  been  in  the  direction 
of  greater  administrative  control,  approaching,  therefore, 
the  French  system,  and  students  of  local  government 
in  the  United  States  are  pretty  well  agreed  as  to  the 
need  of  a  greater  measure  of  central  control  and  as  to 
the  superiority  of  administrative  control  over  the  sys- 
tem of  legislative  control  that  has  been  characteristic, 
as  will  be  seen,  of  the  American  system.  Yet  France  is 
in  the  midst  of  a  movement  in  the  opposite  direction. 
As  these  opposite  tendencies  in  the  two  main  systems  of 
administration  found  in  modern  states,  for  what  is  true  of 
France  is  true  in  a  measure  also  of  the  states  that  have 
adopted  her  system,  tend  to  approach  each  other,  it  may  be 
safe  to  assume  that  the  ideal  scheme  if  such  there  be,  will 
be  found  somewhere  between  the  two  extremes. 

Conclusions  on  French  and  English  Local  Govern- 
ment.—  In  the  light  of  this  brief  survey  of  the  origin,  de- 
velopment, and  present  system  of  local  government  in 
the  two  countries  of  Europe  which  typify  the  two  main 
systems  of  governmental  administration  found  in  the 
civilized  world  to-day,  we  may  revert  briefly  to  the  query 
propounded  at  the  outset  of  this  chapter.  Is  any  particu- 
lar system  of  local  government,  or  is  any  system  of  local 
government  at  all,  necessarily  a  feature  of  governments 
in  general  or  are  its  existence  and  particular  character- 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  63 

istics  simply  the  accident  of  historical  events?  We  have 
undoubtedly  seen  that  local  government  of  some  kind  has 
existed  in  both  England  and  France  as  far  back  as  we 
have  authoritative  information  as  to  the  existence  of  any 
government.  Indeed,  it  is  certain  that  localities,  that  is, 
groups  of  people  in  restricted  areas  with  primitive  gov- 
ernments of  their  own,  antedated  the  existence  of  large 
governmental  units  and  that  states  originated  in  the  es- 
tablishment of  a  central  authority  over  these  groups  by 
force  or  by  voluntary  agreement.  But  the  measure  of 
local  self-government  which  these  localities  were  to  retain 
and  the  conditions  under  which  new  groups  were  to  grow 
up  as  political  or  governmental  units  originally  depended 
principally  on  the  success  of  the  superior  authority  in 
retaining  and  strengthening  its  hold  over  the  subordinate 
groups.  This  success  was  affected  by  a  great  variety  of 
factors,  such  as  internal,  social,  and  economic  develop- 
ment and  the  relation  of  the  superior  power  to  foreign 
political  forces  such  as  other  states  and  the  Church. 
Both  in  England  and  France  we  have  seen  that  the  mon- 
archy was  ultimately  successful  in  asserting  its  predom- 
inance over  the  local  forces  within  the  state,  namely  the 
feudal  nobility,  the  clergy,  and  the  towns.  But  while  in 
England  the  monarchy  gradually  lost  its  position  of  pre- 
eminence in  the  state  in  favor  of  a  national  representative 
body,  in  France  the  absolutism  of  the  monarchy  continued 
until  comparatively  recent  times.  In  consequence  of  this 
divergency  in  national  development  English  local  gov- 
ernment could  and  did  continue  traditions  of  Local  auton- 
omy which  in  France  were  impossible.  In  the  orderly 
development  of  democracy  in  England,  therefore,  during 
the  nineteenth  century,  both  democracy  and  a  large  meas- 
ure of  self-government  for  the  subordinate  divisions  were 
given  increasing  recognition,  whereas  the  instability  of 


64  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

national  institutions  in  France  during  that  same  period 
mitigated  against  a  like  development.  For  the  security 
of  the  national  government  in  France,  whether  it  hap- 
pened to  be  for  the  time  being  a  republic,  a  constitutional 
monarchy,  or  a  virtual  dictatorship,  it  was  necessary  for 
the  central  government  to  keep  its  iron  hand  on  all  ex- 
isting areas,  to  abolish  some,  and  even  to  create  new  ones. 
Not  until  very  recent  times,  therefore,  has  France  been 
in  a  position  to  consider  the  question  of  local  administra- 
tion in  the  way  it  has  been  considered  in  England  for 
nearly  a  hundred  years  past,  namely,  on  its  merits. 

Even  to-day  in  both  countries  historical  traditions 
play  an  important  part  in  the  consideration  given  to  this 
subject.  In  England,  where  tradition  plays  such  an 
important  part,  changes  are  not  considered  until  they 
show  themselves  to  be  necessary  in  experience  rather  than 
because  there  is  a  theoretical  reason  for  improvement. 
In  France,  on  the  other  hand,  the  country  par  excellence 
of  political  theory,  considerations  of  political  necessity 
in  the  past  and  of  political  expediency  in  the  present  have 
operated  until  now  to  prevent  the  application  of  political 
theory.  But  in  both  countries  one  factor  of  prime  im- 
portance is  influencing  the  developments  in  the  field  of 
local  government  and  that  is  the  fact  that  with  the  for- 
merly undreamed  of  expansion  of  governmental  activity 
the  national  governments  are  in  danger  of  being  com- 
pletely swamped  unless  more  and  more  functions  are  en- 
trusted to  subordinate  divisions.  These  functions  not 
only  include  matters  which  in  their  nature  are  clearly  of 
local  concern  primarily,  but  even  matters  which  are 
recognized  as  being  of  direct  concern  to  the  nation  as  a 
whole,  such  as  education,  health,  police,  etc. 

We  may  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  systems  of  local 
government  found  in  these  countries  represent  the  result 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  65 

of  historical  developments  rather  than  of  scientific  study 
of  the  problems  of  local  government  and  that  their  pres- 
ent characteristics  are  so  bound  up  with  past  develop- 
ments and  present  social,  economic,  and  political  pecul- 
iarities, that  their  merits  and  defects  are  not  to  be  dis- 
sociated from  these  conditions.  Consequently  it  would 
be  illogical  and  dangerous  to  conclude  from  our  survey 
that  simply  because  a  particular  feature  is  found  to 
work  well  or  ill  in  England  or  in  France  a  similar  feature 
would  necessarily  be  fit  for  adoption  or  rejection  in  the 
United  States,  where  all  these  conditions  set  forth  above 
may  be  fundamentally  different. 

In  order  to  get  the  necessary  background,  therefore, 
for  the  critical  consideration  of  our  own  system  or  sys- 
tems of  local  government  in  the  United  States  it  will  be 
advisable  to  trace  briefly  the  origin  and  development  of 
that  system  in  the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER  II 

ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 
IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  > 

Local  Government  in  the  Colonies 

Early  Colonial  Forms  of  Local  Government. — 
When  the  first  colonists  came  over  from  England  to 
North  America  early  in  the  seventeenth  century  they 
brought  with  them,  of  course,  a  familiarity  with  the  lo- 

1  The  most  valuable  single  treatment  of  this  subject  as  regards 
counties  and  townships  is  to  be  found  in  Howard,  Local  Constitu- 
tional History  of  the  United  States  (Baltimore,  1889),  Johns  Hop- 
kins University  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science.  Based 
to  a  considerable  extent  on  this  work  is  the  treatment  in  Goodnow, 
Comparative  Administrative  Law  (New  York,  1893)),  I,  Book  III, 
Chap.  i.  A  full  discussion  of  local  government  in  the  Colonies  is 
found  in  Channing,  Town  and  County  Government  in  the  English 
Colonies  of  North  America,  Johns  Hopkins  Studies  in  Historical  and 
Political  Science  (Baltimore,  1884),  No.  X.  The  origin  and  de- 
velopment of  city  government  from  Colonial  times  through  the  nine- 
teenth century  will  be  found  discussed  in  Fairlie,  Municipal  Admin- 
istration (New  York,  1901),  Chap,  v,  and  in  condensed  form,  in- 
cluding some  of  the  principal  developments  after  1900,  in  Munro, 
The  Government  of  American  Cities,  third  edition  (New  York, 
1920),  Chap.  i.  The  most  recent  historical  survey  of  rural  local 
government  in  the  United  States  is  Fairlie,  Local  Government  in 
Counties,  Towns,  and  Villages,  new  edition  (New  York,  1914). 
Chaps,  i-iii. 

The  origin  and  development  of  local  government  in  individual 
states  has  been  treated  in  a  large  number  of  books,  monographs,  and 
articles,  many  of  those  relating  to  rural  local  government  being 
listed  in  the  bibliography  to  Fairlie,  Local  Government  in  Counties, 
Towns  and  Villages,  pp.  275  ff,  and  those  dealing  with  city  govern- 
ment being  found  in  Munro,  A  Bibliography  of  Municipal  Govern- 
ment  (Cambridge,  1915).  PP-  8-13. 

66 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  67 

cal  institutions  of  the  mother  country  which  naturally 
served  as  a  model  for  the  foundation  of  their  own  govern- 
mental devices,  modified  though  they  were  in  consequence 
of  a  variety  of  factors  in  the  new  environment.  In  the 
preceding  chapter  was  traced  briefly  the  development  of 
these  local  institutions  from  Anglo-Saxon  times  to  the 
present,  and  now  a  cross-section  of  this  development, 
taken  towards  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
will  show  what  the  system  of  local  government  was  with 
which  the  colonists  were  familiar. 

In  the  rural  areas  the  smallest  unit  of  government  was 
the  parish,  the  successor,  as  has  been  seen,  of  the  town- 
ship or  town,  and  still  sometimes  called  by  the  latter 
name  also.  In  the  parish  or  vestry  meeting  the  inhabi- 
tants possessed  a  democratic  assembly  for  the  considera- 
tion of  parish  affairs  and  the  selection  of  parish  officers, 
and  commonly  also  there  was  chosen,  in  the  larger  par- 
ishes at  least,  a  select  vestry.  The  parish  was  both  an 
ecclesiastical  and  a  civil  unit  dealing  with  matters  that 
concerned  church  property  and  administration,  involving 
the  church  rate,  as  well  as  with  matters  like  highway  ad- 
ministration and  poor  relief  requiring  other  rates.  The 
parish  as  an  ecclesiastical  unit  was  also  the  agency  for 
such  public  elementary  education  as  was  provided. 
Among  the  parish  officers  of  importance,  both  civil  and 
ecclesiastical,  were  the  vestry  clerk,  the  church  wardens, 
acting  also  as  overseers  of  the  poor,  beadles,  sextons, 
etc.,  all  chosen  by  the  parish  meeting,  and,  most  impor- 
tant of  all,  the  constable,  frequently  selected  by  the  jus- 
tices of  the  peace. 

Above  the  parish  there  still  remained  the  hundred  with 
its  high  constable,  serving  as  a  military  and  police  district, 
but  by  this  time  become  a  relatively  unimportant  area. 
The  county  was  the  chief  area  for  local  administration, 


68  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

though  no  longer  possessing  a  real  representative  body 
of  its  own,  the  county  court  having  declined  greatly  in 
importance  by  this  time.  The  lord-lieutenant,  nominally 
at  the  head  of  the  county,  was  largely  a  ceremonial  of- 
ficer, though  having  charge  of  the  county  militia  and 
performing  some  other  minor  functions.  The  sheriff, 
appointed  like  the  lord-lieutenant  by  the  Crown,  had  also 
lost  his  former  position  of  preeminence,  but  was  still  the 
chief  executive  officer  of  the  courts,  summoning  the 
juries,  executing  the  judgments,  and  administering  the 
jails.  The  ancient  office  of  coroner,  selected  by  the 
county  court,  also  survived  in  diminished  importance. 
On  the  administrative  side  the  most  important  func- 
tions were  performed  by  the  justices  of  the  peace  acting 
singly,  in  petty  sessions,  or  in  quarter  sessions.  These 
justices,  appointed  by  the  Crown,  performed  a  large  num- 
ber of  functions  directly,  such  as  the* care  of  county  roads 
and  bridges-,  the  levying  of  county  taxes,  the  granting 
of  licenses,  the  giving  of  special  relief,  etc.,  and  also 
exercised  a  strict  supervision  over  the  parish  officers. 
They  were  subject  to  dismissal  from  office  and  were  care- 
fully supervised  by  the  Privy  Council,  but  the  office  be- 
ing burdensome  and  unsalaried  the  justices  in  reality 
occupied  a  position  of  considerable  independence. 

In  the  urban  areas  the  unit  of  local  government  was 
the  borough,  a  considerable  number  of  new  boroughs  hav- 
ing been  created  by  the  Tudors  for  political  purposes  in 
order  to  insure  greater  support  for  the  Crown  in  Parlia- 
ment. In  fact  the  political  function  of  electing  repre- 
sentatives to  the  House  of  Commons  was  the  chief  activ- 
ity of  the  English  boroughs  at  the  beginning  of  the  sev- 
enteenth century.  The  government  of  the  boroughs  had 
at  this  time  become  largely  oligarchic,  and  close  corpora- 
tions, in  which  but  a  small  portion  of  the  inhabitants  had 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  69 

any  share,  were  the  rule.  Few  boroughs,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  London,  had  attained  any  importance,  a  pop- 
ulation of  ten  thousand  being  attained  in  but  two  or 
three  of  them,  and  even  in  these  few  there  were  hardly 
any  activities  of  importance,  aside  from  police  and  ju- 
dicial administration.  The  borough  parish  performed 
the  same  functions  as  the  rural  parish  and  with  the  same 
officers. 

With  these  local  institutions  as  a  background  the  Eng- 
lish colonists  began  their  life  in  North  America.  Of 
course  in  the  very  beginning  there  was  no  differentiation 
between  local  and  central  government,  the  first  settlements 
having  only  their  purely  local  problems  to  consider.  In- 
deed in  some  of  the  colonies  the  central  colonial  govern- 
ment developed  out  of  a  union  of  the  localities.  As  set- 
tlements became  more  numerous  and  more  scattered,  how- 
ever, we  find  a  differentiation  arising  between  the  central 
government  of  the  colonies  and  the  management  of  local 
affairs  of  the  various  settlements.  Right  at  the  outset 
of  this  development  we  find  that  the  form  in  which  the 
institutions  of  the  mother  country  were  adopted  in  the 
colonies  manifested  some  marked  differences  in  the  var- 
ious colonies  of  North  America,  differences  that  gave 
the  early  systems  distinct  characteristics  which  have  in 
large  part  been  perpetuated  in  the  original  states  and 
extended  to  the  subsequent  states,  so  that  even  to-day 
we  can  roughly  classify  the  various  systems,  of  local 
rural  government  at  least,  according  to  the  variations 
exhibited  in  the  early  colonies. 

These  variations  were  chiefly  due  to  three  factors  in- 
fluencing the  character  of  the  early  settlements,  namely, 
the  nature  of  the  authority  under  which  the  settlements 
were  made,  the  character  of  the  settlers  themselves,  and 
the  character  of  the  country  in  which  they  settled. 


70  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Although  the  earliest  charters  under  which  settlements 
were  made  in  the  North  American  colonies  were  alike 
in  that  they  did  not  contain  provisions  as  to  the  manner 
of  founding  settlements  or  the  management  of  their  local 
affairs,  the  subsequent  character  of  these  charters  was 
not  without  some  influence  in  this  regard.  In  Virginia, 
for  instance,  the*  transformation  of  the  colony  from  a 
trading  company  to  a  crown  colony  tended  to  perpetuate 
English  social  and  governmental  institutions  more  com- 
pletely than  in  Massachusetts  where  by  the  transfer  of 
the  charter  of  the  corporation  from  England  to  the  colony 
there  was  greater  latitude  for  developing  in  new  direc- 
tions. 

In  the  second  place,  the  New  England  colonists  be- 
longed largely  to  the  middle  class  of  England  and  came 
to  the  new  world  from  conscientious  motives  rather  than 
from  a  desire  for  material  gain,  and  were  relatively  free 
therefore  from  caste  feeling  and  naturally  inclined  to- 
wards democracy.  In  Virginia,  on  the  other  hand,  many 
of  the  early  settlers  belonged  to  the  upper  classes  whose 
social  preeminence  was  accentuated  in  contrast  to  the 
large  number  of  indentured  servants  who  were  brought 
to  the  colony  in  the  early  days,  and  still  more  by  the  in- 
troduction of  African  slavery  later  on.  Again,  in  New 
England  we  find  that  the  land  was  granted  to  groups  of 
individuals  for  their  joint  benefit,  who  thus  early  devel- 
oped a  community  consciousness,  whereas  in  Virginia, 
whither  settlers  came  primarily  for  motives  of  amassing 
wealth,  large  land  grants  were  made  to  individuals  who 
thus  tended  to  occupy  a  position  of  social  and  political 
importance  somewhat  akin  to  that  of  the  landholders  in 
England. 

Finally,   we  see   important   differences   between   New 
England  and  the  Southern  colonies  in  the  nature  o-f  the 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  71 

climate  and  the  soil,  which  determined  in  great  measure 
the  character  of  the  settlements  and  the  system  of  local 
government.  In  New  England  neither  soil  nor  climate 
was  favorable  to  agriculture  on  an  extended  scale  and 
the  hostility  of  the  Indians  discouraged  the  erection  of 
isolated  dwellings.  Consequently  the  population  wjas 
concentrated  in  compact  villages  or  towns  clustered 
within  a  distance  of  half  a  mile  from  the  church 
or  meeting  house  and  the  conduct  of  the  affairs  of  these 
communities  was  long  the  primary  concern  of  the  col- 
onists who  relied  upon  fishing,  trade,  and  manufacturing 
as  their  chief  means  of  livelihood.  In  Virginia  on  the 
contrary  the  navigable  rivers  permitted  settlement  at  a 
distance  from  the  coast,  while  the  soil  was  suited  to  the 
cultivation  of  tobacco  which  required  large  plantations 
and  numerous  laborers.  The  settlers  scattered  therefore, 
instead  of  concentrating  in  towns,  and  each  plantation 
owner  was  a  sort  of  manorial  lord  on  his  own  estate 
without  the  need  of  any  local  government.  Here  it  was 
inevitable  that  the  administrative  units  within  the  colony 
would  be  composed  of  groups  of  these  large  plantations, 
constituting  an  area  somewhat  analogous  to  the  English 
counties.2 

These  two  types  of  colonial  conditions  represented  the 
extremes,  the  fundamental  unit  of  government  in  Massa- 
chusetts and  New  England  generally  being  the  town,  and 
in  Virginia  and  others  of  the  southern  colonies  being  the 
county.  It  is  true,  as  will  be  seen,  that  counties,  consist- 
ing of  groups  of  towns,  developed  in  New  England,  and 
that  subdivisions  of  the  county  exercising  powers  of  local 
government  were  established  in  Virginia,  but  the  pre- 

2  For  a  full  description  of  the  systems  in  Massachusetts  and  Vir- 
ginia see  especially  Changing,  Town  and  County  Government  in  the 
English  Colonies  of  North  America. 


72  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

dominating  position  of  the  town  in  the  former  case  and 
of  the  county  in  the  latter  case  have  remained  character- 
istic of  these  portions  of  the  United  States  to  the  present 
day.  In  the  middle  colonies  the  geographical,  climatic, 
and  social  conditions  partook  somewhat  of  the  character 
of  both  the  extremes  already  portrayed,  and,  as  might  be 
expected,  the  local  institutions  reflected  a  combination  of 
the  features  of  the  other  two  types  that  has  caused  the 
system  of  local  government  there  developed  to  be  desig- 
nated as  the  compromise  system,  in  which  the  county  was 
relatively  less  important  than  in  Virginia  but  more  im- 
portant than  in  New  England,  and  the  town  more  im- 
portant than  in  the  southern  colonies  and  less  significant 
than  in  New  England.  A  brief  description,  therefore, 
of  the  most  important  colonies  representing  these  three 
types  of  local  institutions  will  suffice  both  to  give  an  ad- 
equate idea  of  the  scheme  of  local  government  found  in 
the  colonies  and  to  supply  the  originals  of  the  prevailing 
types  in  the  United  States  to-day. 

Local  Government  in  the  Massachusetts  Colony. — 
In  Massachusetts  from  the  earliest  date  the  affairs  of  the 
settlement  were  controlled  by  an  annual  meeting  of  the 
freemen  which  was  called  the  town  meeting.  Settlement 
in  the  communities  and  consequently  participation  in  their 
affairs  was  dependent  upon  membership  in  the  church, 
and  the  meeting  house,  like  the  parish  church  in  England, 
was  used  both  for  divine  services  and  for  the  transaction 
of  town  business.  The  town  meeting  was,  therefore, 
very  similar  to  the  old  English  parish  meeting  or  vestry, 
the  successor  of  the  earlier  town-moot,  though,  as  has 
been  seen,  the  vestry  in  England  had  by  this  time  become 
pretty  generally  a  close  corporation  in  the  character  of 
a  "select  vestry."  The  town  meeting  elected  annually 
a  committee  of  selectmen,  fixed  in  an  early  colonial  law 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  73 

at  not  mote  than  nine,  to  manage  the  affairs  of  the  town 
in  the  interval  between  town  meetings  and  to  perform 
such  functions  as  were  delegated  to  them.  Subject  to  the 
power  of  the  town  meeting  to  overrule  their  actions  these 
selectmen  exercised  pretty  much  all  the  powers  possessed 
by  the  town.  Among  these  powers  were  included  the  care 
of  the  highways,  poor-relief,  the  assessment  and  collec- 
tion of  taxes  and  tithes,  the  preservation  of  the  peace,  the 
passage  of  by-laws,  the  provision  of  elementary  educa- 
tion, and  the  registration  of  land  titles.  The  town  was 
also  made  the  militia  unit,  each  town  constituting  a  com- 
pany, and  was  the  election  district  for  the  General  Court, 
each  town  electing  one  or  more  representatives  at  a  special 
meeting,  presided  over  by  the  selectmen.  For  its  other 
meetings  the  assembly  elected  a  moderator  or  chairman. 
Finally  the  town  had  its  own  court  of  petty  jurisdiction, 
with  a  justice  at  first  appointed  by  the  General  Court  but 
later  locally  elected. 

In  addition  to  the  selectmen,  the  Massachusetts  towns 
had  a  large  number  of  other  officers  chosen  by  the  town 
meeting  or  by  the  selectmen  acting  for  it  and  serving, 
like  the  selectmen,  without  pay.  These  officers  were  for 
the  most  part  replicas  of  the  English  parish  officers,  which 
latter  by  this  time,  however,  were  no  longer  the  agents 
of  the  parish  so  much  as  of  the  justices  of  the  peace. 
Among  the  more  important  of  these  officers  may  be  men- 
tioned the  town  clerk,  the  constable,  the  surveyor  of  high- 
ways, the  overseers  of  the  poor,  the  assessors  and  collec- 
tors of  taxes,  and  the  treasurer.  The  town  clerk  was  sec- 
retary of  the  town  meetings  and  of  the  committee  of 
selectmen,  registrar  of  births,  marriages,  and  deaths,  and 
issued  process  for  matters  triable  before  the  justice  of  the 
peace.  The  constable  was  the  police  officer  of  the  town 
and  sometimes  exercised  additional  duties.     The  surveyor 


74  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  highways  was  charged  with  the  duty  of  constructing, 
maintaining,  and  keeping  free  from  obstructions  the  roads 
and  bridges  of  the  towns.  The  other  officers  named 
above  and  various  minor  officers  performed  the  func- 
tions indicated  by  their  titles,  but  in  the  smaller  towns  the 
selectmen  themselves  frequently  performed  a  number  of 
these  lesser  functions. 

The  principal  unit  of  local  government  in  Massachu- 
setts, then,  was  this  town  or  township  as  it  seemed  to 
be  called  indiscriminately.  There  were  other  designa- 
tions of  local  areas  such  as  village,  plantation,  district,  pre- 
cinct, and  parish,  which  were,  however,  subordinate  or 
at  least  subsidiary  to  the  town.  Villages  and  plantations 
seem  to  have  been  communities  in  the  neighborhood  of 
towns  but  not  yet  created  into  towns  themselves.  They 
seem  to  have  been  designated  "  districts  "  for  education 
and  taxation  purposes,  "  parishes  "  for  ecclesiastical  pur- 
poses, and  "  precincts  "  when  regarded  as  comprising  the 
jurisdiction  of  a  constable.  They  possessed  their  own 
local  assemblies  or  meetings. 

The  New  England  town  was  not  a  public  corporation, 
and  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  boroughs  or  incorporated 
towns  were  not  created  in  New  England  during  colonial 
times  at  all,  with  the  exception  of  two  insignificant  in- 
stances in  Maine  which  lost  their  character  of  boroughs 
when  Maine  was  united  with  Massachusetts  in  1652. 

Although  the  town  in  Massachusetts,  and  in  New  Eng- 
land generally,  turned  out  to  be  the  most  important  unit 
of  local  government,  and,  indeed,  antedated  in  some  cases 
not  only  the  establishment  of  other  local  areas  but  even 
that  of  the  central  government,  it  did  not  long  remain 
the  sole  governmental  subdivision  of  the  colony.  The 
old  English  hundreds,  by  this  time  practically  inactive 
in  England,  were  not  revived  in  Massachusetts,  but  in 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  75 

1643  the  colony  was  divided  into  four  shires,  named  after 
the  familiar  ancient  counties  of  eastern  England,  Essex, 
Middlesex,  Suffolk,  and  Norfolk.  Shires  appear  to  have 
existed  in  some  form  even  before  this,  and  already  in 
1636  the  General  Court  had  established  four  Quarter 
Courts  within  the  colony,  which  later  developed  in  the 
county  courts,  and  in  the  same  year  the  towns  were 
grouped  in  three  militia  districts.  In  each  of  the  shires 
created  in  1643  there  was  provided  a  lieutenant,  at  first 
elected  but  later  appointed  by  the  Governor,  in  charge  of 
the  regiment  of  the  shire,  composed  of  the  companies  of 
the  various  towns.  To  this  larger  area  were  gradually 
entrusted  further  powers  such  as  the  levying  of  taxes,  the 
registration  of  land  titles,  and  probate  administration. 
The  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  became  the  Court  of  Gen- 
eral Sessions  composed  of  justices  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, and  this  court  had  jurisdiction  over  the  laying  out 
of  highways,  the  towns  being  charged  with  the  duty  of 
construction  and  maintenance  of  those  portions  of  the 
highways  lying  within  their  limits.  The  Court  also  per- 
formed certain  other  administrative  functions  such  as 
the  licensing  of  inns,  and  of  liquor  vendors,  the  approval 
of  town  by-laws,  care  of  the  poor  in  certain  cases,  and  the 
determination  of  the  tax  rate  and  its  apportionment 
among  the  various  towns.  In  its  composition  and  pow- 
ers, therefore,  the  Court  oi  General  Sessions  was  not 
unlike  its  prototype,  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  in  Eng- 
land. County  officers  were  provided  for,  such  as  the 
treasurer  and  sheriff,  appointed  in  Colonial  times  by  the 
Governor.  No  representative  body,  it  may  be  noted,  was 
provided  for  county  affairs. 

In  the  other  New  England  colonies  counties  were  also 
created,  though  somewhat  later  than  in  Massachusetts, 
but  they  were  chiefly  judicial  and  militia  districts  and 


76  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

did  not  have  even  as  extensive  an  administrative  jurisdic- 
tion as  that  of  the  Massachusetts  counties.  Not  without 
significance,  however,  was  the  introduction  in  Connecti- 
cut of  the  office  of  local  prosecuting  attorney  in  each 
county,  an  officer  not  found  in  the  English  judicial  system 
but  later  incorporated  into  the  judicial  administration 
of  nearly  all  of  our  states. 

Local  Government  in  the  Virginia  Colony. —  Turn- 
ing now  from  the  typical  New  England  colony  to  Virginia 
we  find  that  although  the  governmental  traditions  of  the 
settlers  were  the  same  here  as  in  Massachusetts  the  dif- 
fering local  factors  mentioned  at  the  beginning  of  the 
chapter  affected  the  application  of  English  institutions 
in  a  substantial  manner.  As  has  been  seen,  land  grants 
in  Virginia  for  purposes  of  settlement  were  commonly 
made  to  individuals  instead  of  to  groups,  but  from  the 
earliest  colonization  there  were  some  settlements  com- 
prising groups  of  families,  as  well  as  plantations  on  which 
dwelt  a  single  family  with  its  servants  and  slaves.  These 
local  groups  of  people  were  variously  designated  as  con- 
gregations or  parishes  in  relation  to  the  church,  and  the 
plantations  were  also  known  as  hundreds.  Even  the 
name  "  city  "  was  found  among  the  localities  that  sent 
representatives  to  the  first  general  assembly  in  1619. 
The  representatives  in  the  first  general  assembly  were 
called  burgesses  and  the  districts  from  which  they  were 
chosen  were  known  as  boroughs,  but  they  had  nothing  in 
common  with  their  English  prototypes  except  this  func- 
tion of  choosing  members  of  the  general  representative 
assembly.  As  early  as  163 1  the  parish  appeared  as  an 
electoral  unit,  and  ten  years  before  that  church  wardens 
were  mentioned.  The  parish  became  the  unit  of  local 
administration  over  the  members  of  the  congregation  and 
it  followed  much  more  closely  the  English  original  than 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  77 

did  the  New  England  town.  A  minister,  two  or  more 
church  wardens,  and  vestrymen,  all  chosen  for  a  year, 
were  early  provided  for  by  law  and  at  first,  it  is  true, 
the  vestry  were  chosen  by  the  vote  of  the  parishioners. 
But  as  early  as  1661  the  law  provided  that  vacancies  on 
the  vestry  should  be  filled  by  the  vestry  itself,  and  so 
it  became  a  closed  body  like  that  of  the  English  parish, 
and  a  democratic  local  assembly  like  the  New  England 
town  meeting  did  not  develop. 

The  Virginia  parish  performed  through  its  vestry  func- 
tions not  only  concerned  with  the  affairs  of  the  church, 
such  as  the  election  of  church  wardens  and  of  the  min- 
ister, and  the  providing  and  management  of  church,  par- 
sonage, and  glebe,  but  also  civil  functions  such  as  the  care 
of  the  poor,  the  recording  of  property  limits  in  the  parish, 
the  counting  of  tobacco,  the  arrest  and  sale  of  negroes  im- 
properly freed,  and  other  minor  duties.  For  these  pur- 
poses the  vestry  could  levy  and  collect  tithes  or  taxes. 
In  addition  to  the  two  church  wardens  as  executive  of- 
ficers, there  was  a  parish  clerk  and  minor  officers.  At 
first  the  parish  figured,  as  was  seen,  as  an  electoral  unit 
for  the  general  assembly  but  after  the  organization  of 
counties  these  latter  became  the  election  districts  and 
though  an  attempt  was  made  to  revive  this  function  of  the 
parish  in  1655,  the  county  continued  as  the  election  dis- 
trict. 

Counties  appeared  as  governmental  subdivisions  in 
Virginia  in  1634  when  the  colony  was  divided  into  eight 
shires,  though  apparently  such  a  division  had  been  con- 
templated as  early  as  16 18.  These  counties  were  organ- 
ized on  the  model  of  the  English  counties  of  the  time  and 
their  number  was  increased  from  time  to  time.  Owing 
to  the  prevalence  of  large  plantations  and  the  scattered 
nature  of  the  population  these  subdivisions  were  more 


78  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

suited  to  care  for  the  governmental  needs  of  lesser  areas 
than  were  the  parishes.  In  some  cases  the  parish  and 
the  county  were  identical,  or  even  several  counties  might 
be  included  within  a  single  parish,  but  as  a  rule  the  county 
comprised  several  parishes. 

The  Virginia  county  was  an  administrative  district, 
an  election  district,  a  militia  district,  and  a  judicial  dis- 
trict. Monthly  courts  held  in  several  of  the  settlements 
by  justices  appointed  by  the  Governor  and  the  Council 
were  established  as  early  as  1623,  and  in  1642  these  were 
called  county  courts,  the  judges  being  known  at  first  as 
commissioners  of  the  county  courts  and  later  as  justices 
of  the  peace.  The  county  court  as  later  developed  con- 
sisted of  eight  or  more  gentlemen  inhabitants  of  the 
county,  commissioned  by  the  Governor,  only  one  of 
whom  apparently,  as  was  the  case  with  the  justices  of 
the  English  quarter  sessions,  had  to  be  learned  in  the  law. 
In  addition  to  its  appellate  jurisdiction  over  the  petty 
cases  decided  by  the  individual  justices,  and  its  original 
jurisdicition  over  all  civil  and  criminal  cases  except  fel- 
onies, the  county  court  was  an  important  administrative 
body.  Among  its  functions  in  this  capacity  was  the  erec- 
tion and  maintenance  of  the  county  court  house,  the  con- 
struction and  repair  of  highways  and  bridges,  the  keeping 
of  rivers  free  from  obstructions,  the  designation  of  land- 
ings, the  controlling  of  the  erection  of  water  mills,  the 
locating  of  tobacco  warehouses,  the  issuing  of  licenses  for 
taverns,  and  the  nomination  of  the  sheriff,  justices,  cor- 
oners, and  constables  for  appointment  by  the  Governor. 
The  court  also  appointed  its  own  clerk  who  acted  as 
recorder  of  deeds.  These  justices  were  chosen  from 
among  the  large  planters  and  constituted,  therefore,  a 
"  squirarchy  "  very  like  that  of  the  justices  of  the  peace  in 
England,  except  that  their  holdings  and  their  control  over 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  79 

the  servants  and  slaves  on  their  plantations  gave  them 
perhaps  an  even  greater  dignity  and  authority  than  that 
enjoyed  by  their  English  originals. 

For  the  performance  of  these  functions  the  county  court 
levied  county  taxes,  for  which  purpose  the  county  was 
divided  into  precincts,  in  each  of  which  a  justice  prepared 
the  list  of  "  tithables."  The  chief  officer  of  the  county 
as  an  administrative  and  judicial  unit  was  the  sheriff,  who 
performed  much  the  same  duties  as  the  English  sheriff 
of  the  period.  He  was  selected  by  the  Governor  from 
among  three  of  the  justices  nominated  by  the  county  court, 
and  in  addition  to  his  duties  as  executive  officer  of  the 
court  as  a  judicial  body  he  collected  provincial  and  county 
taxes  and  usually  the  parish  levy  as  well,  and  acted  as 
county  treasurer.  The  sheriff  seems  to  have  been  as- 
sisted by  constables  appointed  by  the  county  court  over 
designated  precincts  in  which  they  acted  as  local  police 
officers,  besides  serving  warrants,  summoning  coroner's 
juries  and  witnesses,  and  performing  certain  administra- 
tive functions  such  as  inspecting  the  tobacco  fields,  exe- 
cuting the  game  laws,  and  taking  charge  of  runaways. 

The  coroner,  appointed  likewise  by  the  Governor  on 
nomination  of  the  justices,  performed  the  same  functions 
as  those  exercised  by  the  English  coroner  of  that  time. 
Another  county  officer  of  importance  was  the  surveyor 
appointed  by  the  central  authorities. 

The  county  was  the  election  district  for  the  House  of 
Burgesses,  the  sheriff  acting  as  election  officer.  This 
election  was  about  the  only  governmental  function  in 
which  the  non-landholders  of  the  county  participated  and 
at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  even  this  par- 
ticipation was  restricted  to  freeholders. 

Finally  as  a  militia  district  the  county  was  in  charge 
of  a  county  lieutenant  appointed  from  among  the  most 


80  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

important  men  of  the  county  by  the  Governor,  with  au- 
thority to  list  all  males  over  eighteen  years  of  age. 

Although  there  were  relatively  few  settlements  of  any 
importance  in  the  early  days  of  Virginia,  and  ihe  term 
borough,  as  has  been  seen,  designated  in  1619  not  ^oca^ 
government  units  but  mere  election  districts  for  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  one  or  two  of  the  settlements  were  called 
cities,  as  Charles  City  and  Elizabeth  City,  and  were  desig- 
nated as  corporations  in  the  laws,  as  early  as  1623.  Pro- 
vision was  made  early  in  the  eighteenth  century  for  in- 
corporated boroughs  based  on  the  merchant-guild  con- 
stitution of  English  boroughs,  but  this  act  was  later  re- 
pealed and  not  until  1722  was  a  charter  of  incorporation 
granted  in  Virginia.3  This  charter  to  Williamsburg  was 
followed  by  similar  charters  to  Norfolk  and  Richmond, 
all  granted  by  the  Governor.  The  charters  were  similar 
to  those  granted  by  the  Crown  to  English  boroughs  and 
apparently  gave  the  boroughs  a  position  of  independence 
with  relation  to  the  General  Assembly.  The  governing 
body  of  the  borough  corporation  was  reproduced  from 
the  English  boroughs  and  consisted  of  a  common  council 
comprising  mayor,  recorder,  aldermen,  and  councilmen, 
sitting  as  one  body.  Even  the  character  of  the  English 
borough  as  a  close  corporation  was  reproduced  in  Nor- 
folk where  the  council  was  a  self -perpetuating  body, 
though  in  Williamsburg  and  Richmond  the  councilmen 
were  elected  by  the  freemen  of  the  borough  and  the  free- 
holders, while  the  mayor  and  recorder  were  appointed 
by  the  Governor.  Another  characteristic  of  the  English 
borough  reproduced  in  the  Virginia  charters  was  that  of 
special  representation  in  the  assembly,  for  Williamsburg 
and  Norfolk  each  sent  a  special  representative  after  their 

3  For  a  full  discussion  of  colonial  boroughs  see  Fairlie,  Essays  in 
Municipal  Administration  (New  York,  1908),  Chap.  iv. 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  81 

incorporation,  the  franchise  for  members  of  the  Assem- 
bly in  the  latter  city  being  exercised,  however,  not  by  the 
council  merely  but  by  all  the  members  of  the  corporation, 
which  included  freehold  householders,  resident  owners  of 
an  estate  worth  fifty  pounds,  and  tradesmen  of  five  years 
standing. 

The  borough  as  a  corporation  had  the  customary  rights 
and  privileges  of  perpetual  succession,  of  receiving,  own- 
ing, and  disposing  of  property,  of  suing  and  being  sued 
in  the  courts,  and  of  possessing  a  corporate  seal.  The 
functions  of  the  boroughs  were  legislative,  administra- 
tive, and  judicial.  During  most  of  the  colonial  period  the 
judicial  functions  were  the  most  important,  the  mayor, 
recorder,  and  aldermen  being  individually  justices  of  the 
peace  with  jurisdiction  over  petty  civil  suits  and  the  power 
of  commitment  for  criminal  offenses.  Sitting  as  a  body 
these  officers  constituted  a  court  of  record,  meeting  us- 
ually once  a  month,  and  having  both  civil  and  criminal 
jurisdiction,  coordinate,  in  the  later  period,  with  that  of 
the  county  courts. 

The  borough  council  had  authority  to  enact  by-laws 
and  ordinances  for  the  good  government  of  the  borough, 
provided  they  were  not  repugnant  to  the  powers  of  the 
Crown,  the  laws  of  England,  or  the  laws  of  the  colony, 
and  under  special  restrictions  imposed  by  the  charter 
These  general  powers  were  supplemented  and  enlarged 
from  time  to  time  by  special  grants  of  power  by  the 
colonial  legislature.  These  ordinances  related  chiefly  to 
matters  included  under  the  head  of  police  powers  but 
extended  also  to  the  regulation  of  the  prices  of  food. 

Under  the  head  of  administrative  functions,  which  ow- 
ing to  the  insignificant  size  of  the  boroughs,  did  not  in 
colonial  times  assume  great  importance,  were  included 
the  establishment  of  markets  and  fairs,  the  erection  and 


82  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

maintenance  of  public  buildings,  the  keeping  of  streets 
free  from  rubbish  and  obstructions,  the  sinking  of  public 
wells  and  erection  of  pumps,  the  preservation  of  order  at 
first  merely  through  constables  and  later  with  a  force  of 
nightwatchmen,  the  provision  of  fire-engines  and  firemen, 
some  street  improvement,  and  the  beginnings  of  public 
lighting.  At  first  the  income  of  the  boroughs  was  limited 
to  fines,  fees,  licenses,  and  rentals,  but  towards  the  end 
of  the  colonial  period  as  new  needs  developed  authority 
was  granted  by  the  legislature  to  levy  direct  taxes.  But 
these  taxes  did  not  constitute  a  source  of  very  great  in- 
come and  the  total  expenditures  of  the  boroughs  at  this 
time  were  much  below  those  of  cities  of  the  same  size  to- 
day. Of  some  importance,  however,  was  the  fact  that 
even  in  colonial  times  when  the  original  grant  of  corpor- 
ate powers  came  from  the  executive  charter,  the  boroughs 
turned  to  the  colonial  legislature  for  additional  authority, 
thus  paving  the  way  for  the  supremacy  of  the  legislature 
over  the  cities,  which  characterized  the  American  system 
from  Revolutionary  times  on. 

In  Virginia,  therefore,  we  find  in  colonial  times  a 
system  of  local  government,  both  urban  and  rural,  mod- 
eled closely  along  the  English  lines  and  partaking  of  the 
centralized,  unrepresentative,  and  aristocratic  character 
of  the  latter,  in  contrast  with  the  democratic  institutions 
of  Massachusetts  and  of  most  of  the  New  England  states. 
In  the  other  southern  colonies  local  government  developed 
later  than  in  Virginia  owing  to  their  later  settlement, 
but  while  there  were  local  variations  of  some  importance, 
the  system  that  finally  developed  tended  to  approach  that 
of  Virginia. 

Local  Government  in  the  Middle  Colonies. —  We 
will  consider  briefly  the  system  of  local  government  that 
developed  in  the  two  most  important  of  the  middle  col- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  83 

onies,  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  which  manifested 
not  only  a  mixture  of  some  of  the  characteristics  of  the 
two  distinct  systems  already  considered,  but  each  within 
itself  developed  certain  characteristics  that  stamped  the 
local  institutions  adopted  by  the  later  states  formed  to 
the  west  of  these  commonwealths. 

In  both  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  the  first  settle- 
ments were  made  by  the  Dutch,  under  authority  of  the 
New  Netherlands  Company  and  its  successor,  the  Dutch 
West  India  Company.  In  its  charter  of  1629  this  latter 
company  established  a  system  of  local  government  mod- 
eled on  the  lines  of  the  feudal  manors  of  Europe,  where- 
under  large  tracts  of  land,  sixteen  miles  along  the  river 
and  of  indefinite  width,  could  be  secured  by  the  patroons 
who  should  establish  colonies  of  fifty  persons  or  more 
over  fifteen  years  of  age.  Over  the  settlers  these  patroons 
exercised  all  governmental  powers,  with  the  right  of  ap- 
peal to  the  New  Netherlands  Council.  But  the  settle- 
ments were  few  and  small  even  after  1640,  when  the  size 
of  the  patroon's  estate  was  much  restricted,  and  settle- 
ments independent  of  the  patroons  with  a  measure  of  lo- 
cal self-government  were  authorized.  In  1664,  the  year 
of  the  conquest  of  New  Netherlands  by  the  English,  New 
Amsterdam,  by  far  the  most  important  of  the  Dutch 
settlements,  comprised  only  fifteen  hundred  inhabitants. 

In  1665,  the  year  after  the  grant  of  New  Netherlands 
to  the  Duke  of  York,  a  systematic  code  was  drawn  up 
establishing  a  system  of  local  government  for  the  new 
colony.  This  code  provided  for  town  meetings  of  the 
freeholders  to  elect  a  constable  and  eight  overseers  who 
constituted  a  town  board  with  legislative,  financial,  exe- 
cutive, and  judicial  powers.  The  towns  were  made, 
therefore,  the  primary  unit  of  local  government  as  in 
Massachusetts,  but  town  government  was  representative 


84  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

rather  than  democratic  as  in  Massachusetts.  The  foun- 
dations of  county  government  were  also  laid  at  this  time 
in  the  creation  of  judicial  districts,  first  in  Long  Island 
which  was  known  as  York-shire,  called  ridings,  compris- 
ing several  towns  and  presided  over  by  a  sheriff  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor.  A  court  of  sessions  compris- 
ing the  justices  of  the  peace  of  the  riding  exercised  a 
jurisdiction  similar  to  that  of  the  courts  of  quarter  ses- 
sions in  other  colonies.  Similar  courts  were  subse- 
quently established  in  other  portions  of  New  York  and 
for  the  settlements  along  the  Delaware  which  came  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  William  Penn  by  the  charter  of  1681, 
from  which  date  the  institutions  of  Pennsylvania  and 
New  York  became  distinct. 

In  1683  county  government  was  definitely  established 
in  New  York  through  the  creation  of  ten  counties  with 
appointive  justices  exercising  both  administrative  and 
judicial  functions,  and  an  appointive  sheriff  exercising 
the  usual  powers.  In  the  same  year  a  law  was  passed 
providing  for  the  popular  election  of  supervisors  in  the 
towns  of  each  county  for  the  supervising  of  public  affairs, 
the  first  instance  in  the  colonies  of  elective  officers  in  the 
county.  This  feature  was  destroyed  in  1686,  it  is  true, 
after  the  accession  of  the  Duke  of  York  to  the  throne,  but 
by  act  of  the  assembly  in  1691  it  was  revived.  From 
that  time  on  4  each  county  had  a  board  of  supervisors, 
one  chosen  from  each  town  by  the  freeholders,  which  had 
charge  of  the  fiscal  administration  of  the  county,  each 
supervisor  levying,  assessing,  and  collecting  the  county 
taxes  in  his  town.  At  first  the  appointive  justices  of 
the  peace  retained  their  administrative  jurisdiction  over 
highways  and  other   county  affairs,   but  gradually  this 

4  Except  from  1701  to  1703.     See  Goodnow,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  I,  p.  167, 
n.  3- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  85 

jurisdiction  was  transferred  to  the  board  of  supervisors 
whose  powers  became  more  extensive  than  those  of  the 
county  courts  in  Massachusetts.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
New  York  towns  through  their  elective  officials  exercised 
more  extensive  functions  of  local  government  than  those 
possessed  by  the  Virginia  parishes  and  exercised  by  the 
self -perpetuating  vestries.  In  addition  to  the  supervisor 
chosen  to  represent  the  town  on  the  county  board  there 
were  in  the  towns,  as  locally  elected  officials,  the  clerk, 
the  constable,  the  assessors  and  collector,  surveyors,  and 
overseers  of  the  poor. 

There  were  three  charters  issued  to  municipal  corpor- 
ations in  New  York  during  the  colonial  period,  the  ear- 
liest being  granted  in  1686  to  New  York  City  and  to  Al- 
bany, though  New  York  was  recognized  as  a  borough 
corporation  in  1665,  having  been  accorded  the  character 
of  a  city  by  the  Dutch  West  India  Company  as  early  as 
1653.5  New  York  City,  though  smaller  than  Boston 
and  falling  behind  Philadelphia  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
always  retained  its  position  of  preeminence  in  the  colony 
owing  to  its  commercial  advantages,  and  by  the  time  of 
the  Revolution  had  reached  a  population  of  over  twenty 
thousand.  A  new  charter  was  issued  in  1730  somewhat 
increasing  the  city's  powers,  and  owing  to  the  increase  in 
size  additional  powers  with  authority  to  levy  taxes  for 
their  exercise  were  granted  to  the  city  by  special  laws 
all  through  the  later  colonial  period. 

The  New  York  boroughs  elected  their  councilors  and 
aldermen  by  vote  of  the  freemen  and  freeholders  of  the 
borough,  while  the  mayor  was  appointed  by  the  Governor, 
reappointments  being  common.  Although  enjoying  no 
veto  power  and  no  power  of  appointment  the  mayor  exer- 
cised some  special  administrative  powers,   such  as  the 

0  Fairlie,  o[>.  cit.,  p.  52. 


86  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

licensing  power  over  innkeepers,  in  addition  to  his  judicial 
powers  as  justice  of  the  peace,  member  of  the  borough 
court  and  of  the  county  court,  which  made  him  an  officer 
of  considerable  importance.  The  borough  ordinances 
were  effective  for  one  year  only  unless  reenacted  by  the 
council  or  approved  by  the  central  authorities. 

New  York  City  by  the  end  of  the  colonial  period  was 
performing  a  wide  variety  of  functions,  though  each  was 
developed  to  a  limited  extent  only.  By  1769  the  receipts 
of  the  city  exceeded  ten  thousand  pounds,  a  considerable 
and  increasing  share  of  which  was  derived  by  direct  taxa- 
tion. Among  the  activities  of  the  city  may  be  mentioned 
the  establishment  of  markets  and  fairs,  the  management 
of  ferries,  the  building  and  control  of  docks  and  wharves, 
the  laying  out,  paving,  repairing,  and  cleaning  of  streets, 
the  building  of  drains,  the  erection  and  control  of  pumps 
and  wells,  the  provision  of  fire  engines  and  firemen,  the 
lighting  and  policing  of  streets,  and  the  levying  and  col- 
lecting of  the  necessary  taxes.  Albany,  though  much 
smaller,  exercised  in  general  the  same  powers  as  New 
York  City,  while  the  insignificance  of  Westchester,  the 
third  chartered  borough  in  New  York,  dating  from  the 
earliest  years  of  the  eighteenth  century,  prevented  the  de- 
velopment of  such  extensive  governmental  needs. 

Pennsylvania,  which,  as  has  been  seen,  was  settled  in 
the  same  way  as  New  York  and  developed  similar  insti- 
tutions under  the  Dutch  and  the  Duke  of  York's  laws, 
began  its  individual  existence  as  a  colony  in  1681  by  the 
charter  granted  by  Charles  the  Second  to  William  Penn. 
The  population  was,  however,  very  sparse  and  not  con- 
centrated in  towns.  The  county  was,  therefore,  estab- 
lished as  an  area  of  local  government  before  the  town, 
three  counties  being  established  in  the  province,  and  three 
counties   in  the   "  territory "   which   had   been   acquired 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  87 

from  the  Duke  of  York  and  which  later  became  Delaware. 
Assessors  were  chosen  by  the  local  members  of  the  as- 
sembly to  assist  the  appointed  justices  of  the  peace  in 
tax  administration,  and  in  1696  these  assessors  were 
elected  by  the  county  at  large,  thus  reproducing  in  Penn- 
sylvania the  establishment  of  elective  officers  in  the  coun- 
ties which  had  definitely  taken  place  in  New  York  five 
years  earlier.  The  sheriff,  clerk,  coroners,  and  justices 
of  the  peace  for  each  county  were  at  first  all  appointed  by 
the  Governor,  the  county  being  principally  a  judicial  dis- 
trict and  a  district  for  the  election  of  representatives  in 
the  council  and  the  assembly.  In  1705  the  elective  prin- 
ciple was  extended  to  the  office  of  sheriff. 

The  most  significant  development  in  the  system  of  local 
administration  in  Pennsylvania  occurred  in  1724  when  it 
was  provided  that  each  county  should  elect  at  large  three 
commissioners  to  manage  the  fiscal  affairs  of  the  county 
in  place  of  the  justices  of  the  peace.  This  body,  like  the 
board  of  supervisors  in  New  York  became  the  chief  ad- 
ministrative authority  of  the  county,  but  instead  of  being 
a  large  board  composed  of  representatives  of  the  towns, 
which  had  not  yet  been  established  in  Pennsylvania,  it 
was  a  small  body  elected  for  the  whole  county.  Thus 
arose  the  "  commissioner "  system  of  elective  county 
boards  as  distinguished  from  the  "  supervisor "  system 
of  New  York,  which  two  types  determined  the  character- 
istics of  the  county  system  adopted  by  the  later  states. 

Towns  did  not,  as  has  been  said,  develop  in  Pennsyl- 
vania until  after  the  county  had  been  developed  to  a 
considerable  degree  as  the  area  of  local  representative 
government,  and  when  established  the  towns  were  rela- 
tively less  important  here  than  in  New  York,  so  that  Penn- 
sylvania from  this  point  of  view  approximated  more  the 
Virginia  than  the  New  England  system.     At  first,  in- 


88  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

deed,  town  meetings  were  not  even  provided  for,  the  over- 
seers of  the  poor  being  appointed  by  the  justices  of  the 
peace  and  the  supervisors  of  highways  being  elected  by 
the  voters  of  the  town.  Chartered  boroughs  on  the  Eng- 
lish model  appeared  as  early  as  1687  and  five  such  bor- 
oughs in  all  were  created  during  the  colonial  period,  but 
with  the  exception  of  Philadelphia,  which  had  overtaken 
both  New  York  and  Boston  in  population  by  the  middle 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  colonial  boroughs  of  Penn- 
sylvania were  of  slight  importance,  though  they  served 
as  the  model  of  the  later  Pennsylvania  system  of  borough 
government  for  villages  and  towns. 

Philadelphia  was  created  a  borough  prior  to  1691, 
though  the  charter  of  that  year  is  the  earliest  one  so  far 
found.  The  borough  freemen  in  Philadelphia  comprised 
all  adult  residents  who  were  freeholders  or  who,  possess- 
ing personal  property  to  the  value  of  fifty  pounds,  had 
resided  in  the  city  two  years,  provided  in  either  case  that 
the  admission  fee  was  paid.  But  the  council  was  re- 
newed by  cooperation,  that  is,  vacancies  were  filled  by  the 
council  itself.  The  charter  of  1701  provided  for  life 
tenure  for  councilmen  while  the  mayor  was  appointed  by 
the  Governor.  The  powers  of  the  borough  of  Philadel- 
phia and  the  extent  to  which  those  powers  were  used  were 
substantially  the  same  as  in  New  York.  The  four  small 
boroughs  had  a  simpler  form  of  government  and  a  much 
more  restricted  field  of  activity.  The  council  in  these 
boroughs  consisted  of  two  burgesses,  one  being  designated 
the  chief  burgess,  and  a  small  number  of  assistants,  chosen 
by  the  local  electors. 

The  two  other  middle  colonies,  New  Jersey  and  Dela- 
ware, followed  in  general  the  line  of  development  as 
shown  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  respectively,  the 
former  being  established  as  a  separate  colony  by  the  Duke 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  89 

of  York  in  1664,  the  latter  being  separated  from  Pennsyl- 
vania by  a  charter  granted  by  William  Penn  in  1701.  In 
New  Jersey  there  developed  the  supervisor  system  while 
in  Delaware  conditions  favored  the  commissioner  system. 
The  concentration  of  population  in  towns  resulted  in 
New  Jersey  in  their  relatively  greater  importance  and  in 
the  incorporation  of  five  chartered  boroughs  during  the 
colonial  period,  whereas  in  Delaware  no  charter  of  in- 
corporation was  granted  prior  to  the  Revolution. 

One  other  point  remains  to  be  mentioned  in  connec- 
tion with  the  system  of  local  government  in  the  colonies 
which  was  a  characteristic  not  only  of  the  English  system 
from  which  the  colonial  system  was  derived,  but  has  in  a 
measure  continued  to  the  present  time.  With  the  excep- 
tion of  the  places  specially  designated  as  corporations, 
those  being  principally  the  chartered  boroughs  of  which 
a  score  were  created  in  colonial  times,  the  areas  of  local 
government  were  not  regarded  as  local  corporations  with 
a  sphere  of  action  of  their  own,  but  merely  subdivisions 
of  the  state  for  purposes  of  convenience  in  the  administra- 
tion of  governmental  matters.  This  was  true  not  only 
of  the  counties,  which  at  first  possessed  only  centrally 
appointed  officers,  but  also  of  the  towns  which  elected 
their  own  officers.6  Nor  did  the  introduction  of  the 
elective  principle  for  the  filling  of  county  offices  alter  the 
condition  of  the  county  from  this  point  of  view.  Later 
on,  as  will  be  seen,  corporate  capacity  was  commonly  con- 
ferred by  statute  on  towns  and  counties,  but  they  have 
continued  to  be  regarded  primarily  as  units  of  state  ad- 
ministration with  no  inherent  local  powers  of  their  own. 
Boroughs  and  cities,  on  the  other  hand,  were  created  pri- 
marily for  the  satisfaction  of  local  needs,  though,  as  has 

6  The  Massachusetts  towns  were  accorded  a  limited  corporate 
capacity  in  colonial  times. 


90  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

been  shown,  they  were  not  regarded  as  possessing  a  local 
taxing  power  unless  this  was  expressly  conferred  upon 
them.  This  general  distinction  between  counties  and 
their  subdivisions  on  the  one  hand  and  cities  on  the  other, 
namely  that  the  former  are  primarily  units  of  state  admin- 
istration while  the  latter  are  primarily  corporations  for 
the  satisfaction  of  local  needs,  continues  in  a  measure  to- 
day, though  cities  have  tended  increasingly  to  be  charged 
with  what  may  be  regarded  as  state  functions. 

Local  Government  from  Revolutionary  Times 
to  1800 

The  adoption  of  state  constitutions  by  the  original  col- 
onies was  not  accompanied  by  any  radical  change  in  the 
system  of  local  government,  for  the  existing  legislation 
was  continued  except  in  so  far  as  altered  in  the  constitu- 
tions, and  these  as  a  rule  contained  very  little  with  regard 
to  local  government.  Such  provisions  as  were  included 
in  the  Revolutionary  constitutions  for  the  most  part  per- 
petuated the  main  features  of  the  existing  system.7 
The  changes  that  were  made  were  principally  in  the  di- 
rection of  altering  the  method  of  selecting  county  officials 
from  that  of  central  appointment  to  local  election,  either 
direct  or  indirect.  Thus  sheriffs  were  made  directly  elec- 
tive in  New  Jersey  and  Maryland,  and  in  Pennsylvania 
two  nominees  were  selected  by  popular  vote,  one  of  whom 
the  Governor  commissioned,  while  in  Georgia  all  civil 
county  officers  except  justices  of  the  peace  and  registers 
of  probate  were  made  elective.  Justices  of  the  peace 
were  not  yet  made  elective  but  their  selection  was  com- 

7  For  the  text  of  the  Revolutionary  state  constitutions  as  well  as 
of  subsequent  constitutions  in  these  and  the  later  states  see  Thorpe, 
The  Federal  and  State  Constitutions,  Colonial  Charters  and  Organic 
Laws,  Government  Printing  Office   (Washington,  1909). 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  91 

monly  put  in  the  hands  of  the  legislature  instead  of  the 
governor,  in  line  with  the  general  tendency  to  curtail  the 
powers  of  the  executive.  Furthermore  a  definite  short 
tenure  of  office  for  justices  became  the  rule  instead  of  the 
former  indefinite  tenure  under  which  they  commonly 
served  in  the  colonies. 

If  the  Revolutionary  state  constitutions  said  little  on 
the  subject  of  county  government,  there  was  even  less 
said  about  municipal  corporations  or  cities.  Neverthe- 
less two  very  important  developments  occurred  in  the 
period  between  the  Revolution  and  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century  which  had  a  determining  effect  on 
American  city  government  from  that  time  on.  In  the 
first  place  city  charters  were  now  granted  not  by  the 
governors  alone  but  by  the  legislature  and  the  governor 
in  the  regular  process  of  legislation.  This  altered  the 
fundamental  character  of  the  city  charter  from  that  of 
an  executive  grant  conferring  powers  with  which  the  legis- 
lature could  not  interfere  to  that  of  an  ordinary  law 
subject  to  repeal  or  amendment  at  the  will  of  the  legisla- 
ture. It  is  true,  as  has  been  seen,  that  even  in  the  later 
colonial  period  the  cities  looked  to  the  legislatures  for  new 
powers  not  included  in  their  corporate  charters,  but,  from 
the  time  of  the  establishment  of  state  governments  on,  the 
legislature  had  complete  freedom  either  to  enlarge  or  to 
restrict  both  powers  and  duties  of  the  cities,  a  power 
which  they  soon  began  to  exercise  in  the  minutest  fashion 
and  frequently  without  regard  to  the  wishes  of  the  city 
and  in  a  manner  detrimental  to  it.  This  subjection  of 
the  city  to  the  state  legislature  became  one  of  the  unfor- 
tunate characteristics  of  American  city  government  which 
half  a  century  later  led  to  the  introduction  of  constitu- 
tional restrictions  on  the  powers  of  the  state  legislatures 
over  cities,  culminating  finally  in  the  home-rule  charter 


92  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

system.  The  other  novel  feature  of  city  government  that 
made  its  appearance  before  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury was  the  introduction  of  the  bicameral  councils  into 
cities  in  place  of  the  former  single  body  comprising  mayor, 
aldermen,  and  councilors.  This  innovation,  exemplified 
in  Baltimore  in  1797  and  in  Philadelphia  in  1796,  was  ac- 
companied also,  in  the  former  case,  by  the  first  instance 
of  the  later  universal  tendency  to  set  up  the  mayor  as  a 
separate  branch  of  the  city  government,  not  elected  by 
the  council,  who  should  enjoy  the  veto  and  the  appoint- 
ing power.  These  new  features,  simply  copied  from  the 
Federal  Government,  were  destined  to  become  fundamen- 
tal characteristics  of  municipal  organization  in  the  United 
States  for  the  next  hundred  years.  Finally  may  be  men- 
tioned the  fact  that  in  this  period  also  the  type  of  close 
corporation,  exemplified  by  Philadelphia,  Norfolk,  and 
Annapolis,  gave  way  to  the  system  of  popular  election 
of  councilors.  But  as  the  former  system,  though  char- 
acteristic of  English  boroughs  at  that  time  and  until  1835, 
was  the  exception  in  the  colonies,  this  can  hardly  be  con- 
sidered as  a  new  development  but  rather  merely  as  an  ex- 
tension of  what  had  been  the  American  plan  even  before 
the  Revolution. 

At  the  close  of  the  Revolution  all  of  the  territory  of 
the  United  States  as  determined  by  the  treaty  of  peace 
was  under  the  theoretical  jurisdiction  of  one  or  more  of 
the  original  states.  The  territory  north  of  the  Ohio  river 
was  claimed  in  its  entirety  by  Virginia  and  in  part  by 
Massachusetts  and  Connecticut.  But  there  were  virtually 
no  settlements  in  all  this  region  up  to  this  time  and  no 
local  government  had  been  established.  When,  therefore, 
in  the  years  1 784-1 786  these  states  gave  up  their  claims 
to  this  territory  —  with  the  exception  of  the  Western 
Reserve  of  Connecticut,  which  was  not  ceded  until  1800 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  93 

—  the  Congress  of  the  Confederation  was  free  to  establish 
a  system  of  local  government  for  this  territory  without 
special  reference  to  the  local  institutions  of  the  claimant 
states.  The  Northwest  Ordinance  of  1787  gave  to  the 
governor  the  power  to  lay  out  the  territory  into  counties 
and  townships  as  well  as  judicial  districts,  subject  to  al- 
terations to  be  made  by  the  legislature  when  constituted. 
These  counties  and  townships  were  to  be  election  districts 
for  the  legislature  as  well  as  areas  of  local  administra- 
tion, and  their  judicial  magistrates  and  civil  officers  were 
to  be  appointed  by  the  Governor.  The  first  county  was 
established  three  years  later  with  sheriff,  treasurer,  cor- 
oner, recorder  of  deeds,  probate  judge  and  justices  of 
the  peace,  all  appointed  by  the  Governor.  The  court  of 
quarter  sessions  or  county  court  was  given  authority  to 
appoint  township  officers,  and  the  areas  of  the  civil  town- 
ships were  usually  identified  with  those  of  the  land  sur- 
vey townships,  approximately  six  miles  square.  At  first 
the  court  of  quarter  sessions  acted  as  administrative 
and  financial  authority  for  the  county  but  later  an  ap- 
pointive board  of  three  county  commissioners  was  charged 
with  the  financial  administration,  while  the  township  offic- 
ers were  made  elective  by  the  town  meeting.  But  up 
to  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  population  was 
sparse  and  none  of  the  districts  tentatively  laid  out  for 
future  states  had  attained  a  population  sufficient  for  this 
purpose.  In  1800  the  Northwest  territory  was  divided 
into  two  districts,  the  western  portion  being  designated  as 
Indiana  Territory. 

In  the  territory  south  of  the  Ohio  River,  Virginia, 
North  Carolina,  and  Georgia  claimed  the  territory  west 
to  the  Mississippi  River  and  South  Carolina  also  claimed 
a  small  strip  of  land  a  few  miles  wide.  But  except  in 
the  lands  to  the  west  of  Virginia  and  of  North  Carolina 


94  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

there  was  scarcely  any  population  at  the  close  of  the  Rev- 
olution. The  settled  portions  of  these  states  west  of  the 
Alleghany  mountains  had  become,  moreover,  practically 
independent  districts,  prior  to  their  admission  as  the  states 
of  Kentucky  and  Tennessee  in  1792  and  1796,  respec- 
tively. North  Carolina  ceded  her  jurisdiction  over  Ten- 
nessee to  the  United  States  in  1790,  and  Virginia  had 
previously  consented  to  the  establishment  of  Kentucky  as 
an  independent  state.  South  Carolina  had  ceded  her  strip 
in  1787  while  Georgia  maintained  her  claim  to  the  west- 
ern lands  until  1802,  the  southern  portion  of  these  lands, 
however,  having  been  erected  into  the  Mississippi  Terri- 
tory in  1798. 

In  Kentucky,  prior  to  its  admission  as  a  new  state,  the 
characteristic  Virginia  system  had  prevailed.  In  the  first 
constitution  of  1792  the  nine  counties  were  made  elec- 
tion districts  for  senators  and  representatives  and  it  was 
provided  that  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  each  county  be 
made  appointive  by  the  Governor  during  good  behavior, 
but  sheriffs  and  coroners  were  made  elective  for  three- 
year  terms.  In  the  constitution  of  1799,  however,  the 
county  courts,  composed  of  justices  appointed  during 
good  behavior  by  the  governor,  from  among  two  candi- 
dates nominated  for  each  place  by  the  court,  nominated 
two  of  their  own  number  for  the  position  of  sheriff,  one 
of  whom  was  then  commissioned  for  a  term  of  two  years 
by  the  Governor.  Surveyors  and  coroners  were  also 
commissioned  by  the  Governor  from  double  lists  sub- 
mitted by  the  county  court,  while  the  clerk  of  the  court, 
collectors,  constables,  jailers,  and  other  inferior  county 
officers  were  appointed  by  the  court  itself,  thus  establish- 
ing the  self -perpetuating  system  of  county  administration 
found  in  Virginia. 

In  Tennessee  the  constitution  of   1796  conferred  on 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  95 

the  county  courts  the  power  to  appoint  sheriffs,  clerks, 
coroners,  trustees,  and  constables  for  the  term  of  two 
years,  the  sheriffs  and  coroners  to  be  commissioned  by 
the  Governor.  The  justices  of  the  peace  were  appointed 
by  the  legislature  to  hold  office  during  good  behavior. 
The  Tennessee  system  was,  therefore,  very  similar  to  that 
of  the  older  Southern  states  from  which  the  early  set- 
tlers very  largely  came. 

Local  Government  from  1800  to  1850 

The  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  marked 
by  three  important  phases  of  special  significance  in  the 
history  of  local  government.  The  first  comprised  the 
changes  that  occurred  in  the  system  of  the  older  states 
already  established  by  the  end  of  the  preceding  century. 
The  second  feature  of  this  period  was  the  creation  of  new 
states  in  all  of  the  federal  territories  comprised  within 
the  boundaries  established  by  the  treaty  of  peace  with 
Great  Britain.  The  third  important  development  was 
the  rounding  out  of  the  continental  domain  of  the  United 
States  by  the  Louisiana  purchase  of  1803,  the  acquisition 
of  Florida  in  18 19,  the  annexation  of  Texas  in  1845, 
the  settlement  of  the  Oregon  boundary  dispute  in  1846, 
and  the  acquisition  of  the  Mexican  possessions  by  the 
treaty  of  Guadalupe  Hidalgo  in  1848.  In  these  new  ac- 
quisitions seven  new  states  were  created  during  the  first 
half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  including  California,  ad- 
mitted in  1850. 

Local  Government  in  the  Old  States. — In  the  old 
states  there  were  few  changes  from  the  system  of  town 
and  county  government  existing  at  the  end  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  during  the  first  twenty  years  of  the  nine- 
teenth, but  beginning  with  the  second  decade  of  the  new 
century  there  were  introduced  significant  changes.     One 


96  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  these  was  the  progressive  extension  of  the  elective  prin- 
ciple for  the  choosing  of  county  officers.  This  develop- 
ment, which  was  one  of  the  consequences  of  the  spread 
of  the  Jacksonian  ideas  of  democracy,  made  itself  felt 
in  all  of  the  older  states  during  this  period,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  Maryland,  Virginia,  the  two  Carolinas,  and 
Kentucky.  Another  important  development  was  the 
transfer  in  several  New  England  states,  notably  in  Massa- 
chusetts after  1828,  of  the  administrative  powers  of  the 
county  courts  to  a  small  elective  board  of  county  com- 
missioners on  the  Pennsylvania  model.  But  few  signifi- 
cant changes  occurred  during  this  period  in  the  distribu- 
tion of  functions  between  the  county  and  the  smaller  di- 
visions, the  states  being  roughly  grouped  as  before  into 
the  three  classes  into  which  they  fell  from  this  point  of 
view  in  colonial  times.  Of  considerable  importance  with 
regard  to  the  place  of  the  county  in  the  governmental 
scheme  everywhere,  however,  was  the  development  of  po- 
litical parties.  The  county,  being  practically  everywhere 
the  election  district  for  members  of  the  state  legislature 
and  developing  furthermore  an  increasing  number  of 
paid  elective  offices,  became  at  an  early  period  in  the 
nineteenth  century  the  natural  unit  for  political  party 
machines,  a  development  which  has  not  been  without  its 
effect  on  the  intimate  relation  between  party  politics  and 
county  administration  to-day.  The  spoils  system  par- 
ticularly, another  political  growth  of  the  period,  has  held 
its  own  in  county  administration  long  after  successful  in- 
roads were  made  upon  it  in  national,  state,  and  city  gov- 
ernment through  the  so-called  merit  system  in  the  civil 
service. 

While  these  changes  were  occurring  in  the  system  of 
local  rural  administration  in  many  of  the  older  states, 
even  more  important  changes  developed  in  the  field  of 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  97 

city  government.8  Some  of  these  changes  had  already 
been  forecast,  as  has  been  seen,  in  the  more  important 
charters  granted  in  the  closing  years  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  while  others  were  new  developments  of  this 
period.  We  have  seen  how  Philadelphia  and  Baltimore 
were  provided  with  a  bicameral  council  on  the  plan  of 
the  state  and  national  legislatures  before  the  close  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  and  how  in  Baltimore  the  mayor  was 
created  somewhat  in  the  image  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States.  The  bicameral  feature  was  extended 
to  other  cities  in  the  old  states  in  the  period  now  under 
consideration,  notably  Pittsburgh,  Boston,  and  New  York. 
The  practice  of  local  selection  of  the  mayor  instead  of 
central  appointment  became  the  rule  during  this  half 
century,  the  earlier  charters  putting  the  selection  in  the 
hands  of  the  council,  the  charters  granted  after  1820,  how- 
ever, generally  providing  for  popular  election  of  the 
mayor.  This  served  still  further  to  emphasize  the  im- 
portance of  the  office  of  mayor  and  to  pave  the  way  for 
the  material  increase  in  his  powers  which  occurred  in  the 
second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century.  During  this 
period,  however,  the  council  remained  the  important  mu- 
nicipal authority. 

Other  important  developments  which  occurred  not 
merely  in  the  municipal  history  of  the  older  states  but 
also  in  territories  and  newly  admitted  states,  during  this 
period  were  the  extension  of  the  municipal  franchise  prac- 
tically to  universal  manhood  suffrage,  the  domination  of 
municipal  politics  by  the  state  and  national  organizations, 
and  the  introduction  of  the  spoils  system.  The  rapid 
increase  in  the  size  of  cities  during  the  latter  half  of  the 
period  now  under  consideration  resulted  in  the  granting 

8  See  Fairlie,  op.  cit.,  pp.  79-85- 


98  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  many  new  charters.  Even  in  New  England,  where  up 
to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  idea  of 
special  organization  for  cities  had  made  no  headway 
against  the  universal  town-meeting  system,  nine  city  char- 
ters were  granted  to  manufacturing  and  commercial  cen- 
ters which  had  outgrown  the  practicability  of  govern- 
ment by  town  meeting.  Not  only  was  the  number  of  in- 
corporated cities  largely  increased,  but  some  of  them  had 
attained  a  size  which  rendered  imperative  the  grant  by 
the  legislature  of  larger  powers,  especially  of  a  financial 
nature.  It  became  common  in  this  period  to  grant  a  gen- 
eral taxing  power  for  municipal  purposes,  but  these  pur- 
poses were  limited  to  those  enumerated  by  the  legislature, 
and  for  every  proposed  new  undertaking  the  cities  had 
to  resort  to  the  legislature.  As  the  legislatures  considered 
it  necessary  to  go  into  great  detail  in  these  enactments 
the  subordination  of  the  cities  to  the  legislature  which 
began  soon  after  colonial  times  became  more  and  more 
complete  until  the  legislatures  were  submerged  by  requests 
for  special  laws  for  cities  and  the  cities  themselves  lost 
most  of  their  discretion  and  local  freedom.  A  consider- 
able expansion  of  municipal  activities  occurred  during  this 
period  especially  in  the  larger  cities,  and  many  of  the  ac- 
tivities which  had  existed  only  in  rudimentary  form  in  the 
colonial  and  eighteenth  century  cities  developed  under 
special  departments  in  the  new  century.  In  addition  to 
the  growth  of  the  activities  already  noted  in  the  larger 
colonial  boroughs  public  health  authorities  were  estab- 
lished in  some  of  the  larger  cities  to  prevent  the  introduc- 
tion and  spread  of  epidemics,  but  school  administration 
and  poor  relief  continued  generally  to  be  considered  dis- 
tinct from  city  administration. 

Local  Government  in  the   New  States. —  Turning 
now  from  the  states  which  existed  at  the  beginning  of  the 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  99 

nineteenth  century  to  those  admitted  during  the  next  fifty 
years  we  may  conveniently  group  these  latter  into  four 
classes.  The  first  of  these  classes  comprises  the  states 
carved  out  of  the  Northwest  Territory,  namely  Ohio,  In- 
diana, Illinois,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin.  The  second 
group  consists  of  the  Southern  states  created  east  of  the 
Mississippi,  namely  Mississippi,  Alabama,  and  Florida. 
The  third  group  comprises  the  states  on  the  western 
shore  of  the  Mississippi  established  in  the  Louisiana  Pur- 
chase, namely  Louisiana,  Missouri,  Arkansas,  and  Iowa. 
The  last  group  consisting  of  Texas  and  California  was 
created  out  of  territory  formerly  belonging  to  Mexico 
and  secured  for  the  United  States  in  consequence  of  the 
Mexican  War.  In  the  systems  of  local  government  es- 
tablished in  all  of  these  states  it  will  be  seen  that  the  de- 
termining factors  in  fashioning  local  institutions  were, 
first,  the  traditions  of  local  government  brought  in  by 
the  majority  of  the  settlers,  and  second,  the  geographic 
and  economic  conditions  of  the  new  areas,  while  in  those 
states  which  had  existed  as  governmental  areas  before 
their  incorporation  into  the  United  States  some  heritages 
of  the  older  systems  continued. 

We  have  already  noted  (page  93)  the  beginnings  of 
local  institutions  in  the  Northwest  Territory  before  the 
close  of  the  eighteenth  century.  We  will  now  trace  the 
development  of  these  institutions  in  the  new  states  formed 
in  this  territory  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century.9  In  1800  Indiana  Territory  was  separated  from 
the  Northwest  Territory  with  the  local  government  system 
already  described,  and  in  1802  the  state  of  Ohio  was  cre- 
ated out  of  the  Northwest  Territory,  rounded  out  by  the 
cession  in  1800  of  the  Connecticut  Western  Reserve. 
The  offices  of  sheriff,  coroner,  and  justice  of  the  peace, 

9  See  particularly  Howard,  op.  cit.,  Chaps,  iv  and  x. 


ioo  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

appointive  under  the  territorial  government,  were  made 
elective  in  Ohio,  the  justices  being  elected  in  the  town- 
ships, while  all  town  and  township  officers  were  locally 
elected.  The  quarter  sessions  at  first  exercised  adminis- 
trative and  financial  powers  for  the  county  but  in  the 
first  legislation  of  the  new  state  all  county  officers  were 
made  elective  and  an  elective  board  of  three  commission- 
ers was  provided  as  the  administrative  and  fiscal  authority 
of  the  county.  The  townships  being  of  relatively  little 
importance,  owing  to  the  scattered  settlement  of  farmers 
instead  of  concentration  in  communities,  we  find  both  the 
governmental  traditions  of  the  settlers  who  came  in  large 
part  from  Pennsylvania,  and  the  physical  conditions  in 
the  new  state  influencing  the  adoption  of  a  scheme  of  local 
government  modeled  very  closely  on  that  of  Pennsyl- 
vania. This  type  of  local  government  known  as  the 
"  county-township "  system  viewed  from  the  point  of 
view  of  distribution  of  functions  between  town  and 
county,  in  contradistinction  to  the  "  county-precinct  "  sys- 
tem, and  as  the  "  commissioner  "  system,  as  distinguished 
from  the  "  supervisor  "  system,  when  regarded  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  constitution  of  the  administrative 
board,  became  the  characteristic  one  for  the  states  of  the 
Middle  West. 

Indiana  was  admitted  in  1816  and  followed  practically 
the  same  model,  making  all  county  officers  elective  and 
providing  an  elective  board  of  commissioners. 

Illinois  had  been  first  settled  largely  by  immigrants 
from  Virginia,  the  Carolinas,  and  Kentucky.  They 
brought  with  them,  therefore,  a  familiarity  with  the 
"  county-precinct  "  system  of  these  states  in  which  there 
were  no  important  governmental  subdivisions  of  the 
county.  Township  organization  was  not  included,  there- 
fore, in  the  first  constitution  or  early  laws,  though  the 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  101 

geographical  or  congressional  township  existed  here  as 
elsewhere  in  the  Northwest  Territory,  to  the  people  of 
which  the  United  States  government  had  guaranteed  a 
section  or  square  mile  for  the  use  of  schools.  All  county 
business  was  entrusted  by  the  constitution  of  1818  to  elec- 
tive boards  of  three  county  commissioners,  the  way  for 
this  development  having  been  paved  by  the  systems  es- 
tablished a  few  years  before  in  Ohio  and  Indiana.  All 
county  officers  were  made  elective,  including  a  few  years 
later,  justices  of  the  peace  and  constables  chosen  in  pre- 
cincts. The  first  step  in  the  direction  of  a  change  from 
the  "  county-precinct  "  system  to  the  "  county-township  " 
system  in  Illinois  came  with  the  establishment  of  the  con- 
gressional townships  as  public  corporations  for  school 
purposes  with  its  own  officers.  This  creation  of  a  limited 
self-government  for  the  townships  led  to  the  same  district 
being  subsequently  designated  as  an  election  district  as 
well  as  a  district  for  the  justices,  constables,  road  super- 
visors, and  overseers  of  the  poor.  After  the  admission 
of  Illinois  in  18 18  as  a  free  state  and  the  admission  of 
Missouri  in  1821  as  a  slave  state,  further  immigration  into 
Illinois  came  chiefly  from  the  states  to  the  East,  and  set- 
tled in  the  northern  part  of  the  state.  These  elements  in 
the  population  preferred  the  township  system  and  were 
responsible  for  the  insertion  in  the  constitution  of  1848 
of  a  provision  enabling  the  legislature  to  provide  a  sys- 
tem of  township  organization  which  any  county  could 
adopt  by  majority  vote.  This  plan  of  optional  provis- 
ions permitting  two  different  systems  within  the  same 
state  had  already  been  tried  in  Wisconsin  territory  in 
1 84 1  and  was  subsequently  introduced  in  Missouri,  Ne- 
braska, and  North  Dakota.  The  township  system  was 
generally  adopted  by  the  northern  counties  in  Illinois, 
the  legislature  having  provided  that  the  county  board  in 


102  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

such  counties  should  be  constituted  on  the  "  supervisor  " 
instead  of  the  "  commissioner  "  plan. 

The  next  state  to  be  admitted  out  of  the  original  North- 
west Territory  was  Michigan  in  1837.  The  county  sys- 
tem of  Michigan  Territory,  organized  in  1805,  was  the 
same  as  that  found  in  the  other  territories  of  this  region, 
namely  the  county-township  system,  both  county  and 
township  officers  being  made  elective  after  1825.  But 
in  1827  the  "  commissioner "  plan  was  superseded  by 
the  "  supervisor  "  system,  the  largest  immigration  into 
the  state  at  this  time  being  from  New  York  State. 

Wisconsin,  admitted  in  1848,  was  the  last  state  to  be 
created  out  of  the  original  Northwest  Territory.  Begin- 
ning with  the  "  county-district-commissioner  "  system, 
while  still  part  of  Indiana  Territory  and  the  first  twenty 
years  as  part  of  Michigan  Territory,  it  operated  after 
1827  under  the  "  supervisor  "  system  until  its  organization 
as  a  separate  territory  in  1837  when  the  "  commissioner  " 
plan  was  revived.  In  1841  an  optional  law  permitted 
a  choice  between  the  "  commissioner  "  plan  and  the  "  su- 
pervisor "  plan,  but  the  constitution  of  1848  established 
the  "supervisor"  plan  uniformly  for  the  whole  state, 
townships  occupying  much  the  same  position  in  the  local 
government  scheme  as  in  the  other  states  of  this  section. 

While  these  two  more  or  less  distinct  types  of  rural 
local  government  were  developing  in  these  five  states, 
there  were  also  important  developments  in  the  govern- 
ment of  municipal  corporations.  But  these  developments 
were  quite  similar  to  those  already  traced  in  connection 
with  the  history  of  local  government  in  the  older  states 
during  this  period  and  did  not  show  marked  variations 
from  state  to  state.  The  increase  in  size  and  number  of 
cities  chartered  during  this  period,  the  extension  of  the 
suffrage,  the  election  of  the  mayor  by  popular  vote,  the 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  103 

increase  in  municipal  activities,  the  tutelage  of  the  legis- 
latures over  the  cities,  were  developments  that  showed 
themselves  in  the  states  northwest  of  the  Ohio  as  well 
as  in  the  older  states.  Only  the  bicameral  system  seemed 
not  to  take  root  as  extensively  in  this  section.  But  party 
domination  and  the  spoils  system  became  as  firmly  estab- 
lished in  Ohio  or  Illinois  as  in  New  York  or  Pennsyl- 
vania. 

Whereas  the  states  of  the  old  Northwest  Territory 
modeled  their  local  government  systems  on  the  New  York 
and  Pennsylvania  plans,  Mississippi  and  Alabama,  ad- 
mitted in  18 1 7  and  18 19,  respectively,  being  created  out 
of  territory  formerly  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Georgia, 
modeled  their  local  institutions  after  those  of  the  parent 
state.  In  Mississippi  the  first  constitution  made  sheriffs 
and  coroners  elective,  the  justices  of  the  peace  to  be  ap- 
pointed as  the  legislature  might  direct.  This  constitu- 
tion also  authorized  the  creation  of  a  county  court  of  pro- 
bate to  have  control  of  county  police.  The  constitution 
of  1832  added  justices  of  the  peace  and  constables  to  the 
list  of  elective  offices,  and  provided  for  an  elective  county 
board  of  five  members,  chosen  at  large,  to  be  called  the 
county  board  of  police  with  complete  jurisdiction  over 
roads,  highways,  ferries,  and  bridges  and  all  other  mat- 
ters of  county  police,  thus  introducing  the  commissioner 
system  in  place  of  administration  by  the  county  courts. 
Alabama  provided  in  her  first  constitution  for  elective 
sheriffs  and  clerks  of  courts,  leaving  the  justices  to  be 
appointed  as  the  legislature  might  direct. 

Florida,  after  its  cession  by  Spain  in  1819,  was  in  1822 
organized  as  a  territory.  The  appointment  of  local  offic- 
ers, including  justices  of  the  peace,  was  lodged  in  the 
hands  of  the  territorial  governor.  The  first  constitution 
of  Florida  was  framed  in  1838-39  but  did  not  take  ef- 


104  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

feet  until  the  admission  of  Florida  as  a  state  in  1845. 
This  constitution  left  it  to  the  legislature  to  provide  for 
either  election  or  appointment  of  justices  and  also  em- 
powered the  legislature  to  establish  in  each  county  a  board 
of  commissioners  for  the  regulation  of  county  business. 
In  the  period  here  under  consideration  four  new  states 
were  created  in  the  Louisiana  territory,  along  the  west 
bank  of  the  Mississippi.  These  states  differed  consider- 
ably from  each  other  in  their  local  government  traditions 
at  the  time  of  their  admission.  The  first  state  to  be  ad- 
mitted was  Louisiana  in  181 2.  Under  Spanish  rule  there 
had  existed  large  parishes  for  ecclesiastical  administration 
and  when  the  territory  of  Orleans  was  organized  in  1804 
the  legislative  council  divided  the  territory  into  twelve 
counties,  coinciding  in  some  cases  with  the  old  parishes, 
including  in  other  cases  two  or  more  parishes.  But  in 
1807  the  territory  was  divided  into  nineteen  parishes 
which  thenceforth  became  the  units  of  local  government 
in  Louisiana,  the  counties  continuing  for  some  years, 
but  as  election  districts  only.  Administrative  functions 
were  performed  in  the  territory  first  by  the  county  courts, 
then  by  the  parish  courts,  whose  judges  were  appointed 
by  the  governor.  Little  was  said  in  the  constitution  of 
1 8 1-2  concerning  local  government  except  to  lodge  the 
power  of  appointing  local  officers  in  the  hands  of  the 
governor  until  otherwise  provided  by  the  legislature. 
In  the  constitution  of  1845  the  parishes  superseded  the 
counties  as  election  districts  also,  and  sheriffs,  coroners, 
justices  of  the  peace,  and  clerks  of  the  district  courts  were 
made  elective  by  the  qualified  voters  of  the  parishes. 

The  next  state  to  be  admitted  from  the  Louisiana  Pur- 
chase was  Missouri  in  182 1.  In  the  territory  of  Mis- 
souri, organized  in  181 2,  the  governor  was  authorized  to 
divide  the  territory  into  convenient  counties  for  the  elec- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  105 

tion  of  members  of  the  territorial  assembly,  local  judicial 
and  administrative  officers  being  appointed  by  the  gover- 
nor. In  the  first  constitution  of  the  state,  sheriffs  and 
coroners  were  made  elective,  justices  of  the  peace  remain- 
ing appointive,  and  the  transaction  of  all  county  business 
was  entrusted  to  county  probate  courts.  In  1834  the 
clerks  of  the  county  courts  were  made  elective.  Missouri, 
therefore,  retained  during  this  period  essentially  the  old 
Southern  type  of  county  government. 

Arkansas  Territory,  divided  off  from  Missouri  Terri- 
tory in  18 19,  was  governed  in  the  same  way  as  the  older 
territory  already  considered.  In  1836  Arkansas  was  ad- 
mitted as  a  state  under  a  constitution  providing  for  elec- 
tive sheriffs,  coroners,  and  surveyors,  chosen  by  the  qual- 
ified voters  of  the  county,  and  constables  and  justices  of 
the  peace  elected  in  the  township.  County  courts  of  the 
justices  of  the  peace  were  established  as  the  administrative 
authorities  of  the  counties.  This  was  essentially  the  super- 
visor system  since  the  justices  were  elected  by  the  town- 
ships, though  in  form  it  was  the  old  Southern  type  of 
county  administration  by  the  court  of  justices.  The  town- 
ships, however,  were  not  units  of  local  government,  so 
that  the  "  county-precinct,"  or  "  county-district  "  rather 
than  the  "  county-township "  type  was  established,  in 
spite  of  the  terms  used. 

While  the  immigration  into  Louisiana,  Arkansas,  and 
Missouri  was  chiefly  from  the  old  Southern  states  and 
consequently  moulded  their  local  institutions  along  fa- 
miliar Southern  lines,  Iowa,  the  last  state  to  be  admitted 
during  the  first  half  of  the  century  from  the  Louisiana 
Territory,  naturally  followed  the  compromise  system. 
The  commissioner  system  was  established  for  counties 
before  Iowa  became  a  state,  but  townships  were  also  es- 
tablished with  local  officers.     Judges,  sheriffs,  clerks  of 


106  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

court,  and  justices  of  the  peace  were  appointed  by  the 
territorial  governor  but  other  county  officers  as  well  as 
the  township  officers  were  popularly  elected.  The  first 
constitution  of  the  state  in  1846  made  no  change  in  the 
existing  system  except  to  provide  for  an  elective  prosecut- 
ing attorney  in  each  county  as  well  as  an  elective  clerk  of 
the  district  court. 

In  all  of  these  states,  then,  the  extension  of  the  elec- 
tive principle,  which  we  have  seen  characterized  county 
development  in  the  older  states,  was  equally  apparent. 

Finally,  the  local  institutions  of  the  two  other  new 
states  admitted  in  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
Texas  and  California,  need  to  be  briefly  mentioned.  Un- 
der Mexican  rule  Texas,  as  a  department  of  the  State  of 
Coahuila  and  Texas,  had  a  local  government  system  based 
on  the  municipalities,  of  which  there  were  eighteen  at  the 
time  Texas  declared  herself  independent.  The  munici- 
palities were  large  areas  including  not  only  villages  but 
considerable  tracts  of  unsettled  land  around  each.  Many 
of  these  municipalities  were  established  by  the  American 
settlers  who,  after  1820,  began  to  form  colonies  in  the 
eastern  part  of  Texas.  Even  under  Mexican  rule  the 
municipalities  enjoyed  a  measure  of  local  self-government 
and  American  ideas  of  democracy  took  hold.  When 
Texas  became  independent  and  framed  a  constitution  in 
1836,  these  extensive  municipalities  were  made  the  elec- 
tion districts  for  members  of  the  Congress  of  the  Republic 
and  were  thereafter  called  counties.  The  constitution 
required  the  establishment  of  county  courts  and  the  pro- 
vision of  elective  sheriffs,  coroners,  justices  of  the  peace, 
and  constables.  Under  the  Republic  these  provisions 
were  carried  out  and  in  addition  to  these  elective  officers 
county  boards  of  commissioners  were  created  consisting 
of  the  county  judge  and  commissioners  elected  by  pre- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  10; 

cincts,  with  control  over  highways  and  bridges  as  well 
as  poor  relief.  At  the  same  time  the  original  settlements 
in  the  early  municipalities  were  incorporated  as  towns. 
These  arrangements  were  continued  without  change  under 
the  constitution  of  1845,  the  first  constitution  of  Texas 
as  a  state  of  the  Union, 

California,  like  Texas,  was  organized  for  purposes  of 
local  government  under  Mexican  rule,  but  it  had  a  cen- 
tralized system  of  administration.  With  the  conclusion 
of  the  Mexican  War  gold  was  discovered  in  California 
and  thousands  of  immigrants  flocked  thither.  Governed 
at  first  by  a  military  provisional  governor,  California  de- 
veloped frontier  local  institutions  in  the  mining  camps 
which  regulated  their  own  affairs.  A  constitution  was 
framed  in  1849  which  became  effective  upon  the  admis- 
sion of  California  in  1850.  This  constitution  adopted 
the  ten  existing  Mexican  districts  as  electoral  units  for 
the  legislature,  but  directed  the  legislature  to  divide  the 
state  into  counties  in  each  of  which  there  should  be 
elected  county  judges,  county  clerks,  district  attorneys, 
sheriffs,  coroners,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  other  neces- 
sary officers.  The  first  legislature  proceeded  to  organize 
twenty-seven  counties  with  elective  treasurers,  assessors, 
recorders,  surveyors,  and  constables,  in  addition  to  the 
above  mentioned  officers.  But  for  many  years  the  real  lo- 
cal government  was  carried  on  by  the  mining  camps  under 
lynch  law  with  little  regard  for  constitutional  and  statutory 
provisions.  In  the  first  constitution  of  California  provi- 
sion was  made  for  the  organization  of  cities  and  incorpor- 
ated villages  by  the  legislature  with  restrictions  on  their 
financial  powers. 

Local  Government  in  the  New  Territories. —  Finally 
there  remains  to  be  noted  the  organization  of  a  number 
of  new  territories  in  the  closing  years  of  the  period  now 


108  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

under  consideration.  In  1848  Oregon  Territory  was  or- 
ganized, in  1849  Minnesota  Territory  was  created,  and 
in  1850  Utah  and  New  Mexico  Territories  were  estab- 
lished. 

In  Oregon  immigrants  from  the  United  States  had  es- 
tablished a  provisional  government  in  1841  and  adopted 
a  constitution  in  1843  while  this  territory  was  still  under 
the  joint  occupation  of  the  United  States  and  Great  Bri- 
tain and  this  government  continued  in  operation  after  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  title  of  the  United  States  by 
Great  Britain  in  1846  until  the  establishment  of  the  terri- 
torial government  in  1849.  Under  this  provisional  gov- 
ernment counties  had  already  been  established  and  the 
territorial  government  did  not  make  any  changes  in  the 
general  system  established  elsewhere  in  the  territories  of 
the  United  States. 

Minnesota  Territory  comprised  areas  that  had  been 
under  various  territorial  governments  before,  notably 
Wisconsin  and  Iowa  Territories,  but  immigration  had 
been  small  and  local  institutions  did  not  develop  to  any 
great  extent.  Upon  the  creation  of  Minnesota  Territory 
it  was  provided  that  sheriffs,  constables,  justices  of  the 
peace,  and  other  judicial  and  ministerial  officers  in  office 
at  that  time,  within  the  limits  of  the  territory,  should  be 
continued  and  that  the  manner  of  choosing  these  officers 
thereafter  should  be  determined  by  the  territorial  legis- 
lature. Townships  had  not  been  organized  up  to  this 
time  as  local  government  areas  although  it  was  provided 
that  two  sections  of  each  geographical  township  were  to 
be  set  aside  for  school  purposes  as  soon  as  the  govern- 
ment survey  should  be  made. 

Utah  and  New  Mexico  were  both  organized  as  terri- 
tories within  two  years  of  their  acquisition  from  Mexico. 
Like  Texas  and  California  these  lands  had  been  organized 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  109 

under  the  Mexican  system  of  local  government  with  mu- 
nicipalities and  districts  which  became  the  areas  for  the  or- 
iginal counties  later  on.  Identical  acts  of  organization 
were  passed  for  these  two  territories  on  the  same  date,  Sep- 
tember 9,  1850,  anticipating  the  establishment  of  county 
government  and  providing  that  township,  district,  and 
county  officers  should  be  appointed  or  elected  in  such  man- 
ner as  the  territorial  legislature  and  governor  might  pro- 
vide. The  customary  provision  setting  aside  two  sec- 
tions of  each  township  for  school  purposes  was  contained 
in  these  laws,  but  instead  of  being  reserved  for  the  people 
of  each  township,  as  was  done  in  Illinois  for  instance,  the 
reservation  was  in  general  terms  for  schools  in  the  Ter- 
ritory. 

Summary  of  Local  Government  in  the  United 
States  to  1850. —  We  may  now  briefly  summarize  the 
developments  in  local  government  in  the  United  States 
up  to  the  end  of  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
Taking  up  first  the  county  and  its  subdivisions  we  find : 
( 1 )  in  every  state  in  the  Union  10  and  in  every  organized 
territory  of  the  United  States,  the  county  was  recognized 
as  a  governmental  subdivision  of  the  state.  The  func- 
tions of  the  county  varied  from  that  of  a  mere  judicial 
district  in  Rhode  Island  to  the  nearly  all  important  county 
in  Virginia.  Generally  speaking,  however,  the  counties 
existed  in  most  states  as  election,  military,  judicial,  finan- 
cial, and  administrative  districts.  The  extent  of  the 
powers  of  the  county  under  the  last  two  classes  of  func- 
tions varied  greatly  from  state  to  state,  but  the  old  three- 
fold colonial  classification  on  the  basis  of  the  relative 
powers  of  the  county  and  its  subdivisions,  namely  the 
New  England  system  where  the  town  was  more  important 

10  In  Louisiana,  as  was  noted,  the  term  used  was  parish  instead 
of  county. 


no  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

than  the  county,  the  Southern  system  where  the  county 
was  much  the  more  important  and  the  compromise  sys- 
tem of  the  middle  colonies  where  the  functions  of  finance 
and  administration  were  pretty  evenly  divided  between 
the  two,  was  still  quite  plainly  discernible.  The  com- 
promise system  and  the  Southern  system  had,  generally 
speaking,  moved  westward  along  parallel  degrees  of  lati- 
tude into  the  new  states.  (2)  The  elective  principle  for 
county  officers  had  made  considerable  headway  in  the 
Eastern  states,  with  the  exception  of  Maryland,  Virginia, 
the  Carolinas,  and  Kentucky,  and  was  generally  estab- 
lished in  the  newer  states.  (3)  Manhood  suffrage  had 
almost  completely  superseded  the  former  property  and 
taxpaying  qualifications.  (4)  The  number  of  county  of- 
ficers had  tended  to  increase  but  the  old  offices  of  sheriff, 
coroner,  surveyor,  justices  of  the  peace,  and  constables 
were  reproduced  in  the  new  states  together  with  the  newer 
offices  such  as  treasurers,  assessors,  collectors,  prosecuting 
attorneys,  etc.  (5)  An  elective  county  board  was  found 
in  nearly  all  the  states  in  which  the  elective  principle  had 
been  established,  which  performed  the  general  financial 
and  administrative  functions  of  the  county.  This  board, 
which  appeared  under  a  variety  of  names,  was  consti- 
tuted as  a  rule  on  one  of  two  general  principles.  Either 
it  was  a  small  board  elected  at  large  or  in  special  districts, 
and  represented  the  extension  of  the  original  Pennsyl- 
vania "  commissioner "  plan,  or  it  was  a  larger  board 
elected  from  th,e  local  government  subdivisions  of  the 
county  in  imitation  of  the  original  New  York  or  "  su- 
pervisor "  plan.  The  "  commissioner "  plan  had  been 
adopted  in  some  of  the  New  England  states  and  in  some 
of  the  Southern  states  by  this  time  and  was  the  one  gen- 
erally adopted  by  the  new  states  admitted  during  this 
period      (6)  The  county,  though  still  regarded  as  essen- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  in 

tially  an  area  for  the  local  administration  of  state  af- 
fairs, had  been  accorded  a  limited  corporate  capacity  and 
by  reason  of  the  local  election  of  its  officers,  had  become, 
except  in  judicial  and  militia  matters,  largely  indepen- 
dent of  any  state  control  except  that  of  the  legislature. 
In  the  field  of  municipal  government  this  period  was 
marked  (i)  by  the  incorporation  of  many  new  cities 
including  small  towns  and  villages,  (2)  the  development 
of  many  cities  to  large  size,  (3)  the  complete  subjection 
of  cities  to  the  legislature,  (4)  the  general  adoption  of  the 
"  federal  analogy  "  as  a  model  for  city  charters,  includ- 
ing in  a  number  of  the  larger  cities  a  bicameral  legislature, 
(5)  the  subordination  of  municipal  politics  to  state  and 
national  organizations,  (6)  the  establishment  of  the 
spoils  system,  and  (7)  the  adoption  of  manhood  suffrage. 

Local  Government  from  1850  to  1900 

During  the  last  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  main 
characteristics  of  local  government  in  the  United  States 
as  exhibited  at  the  close  of  the  preceding  period  were  not 
greatly  altered,  especially  in  the  field  of  county  govern- 
ment. A  good  many  changes  occurred,  it  is  true,  in  the 
systems  of  individual  states,  and  a  dozen  new  states  were 
admitted  in  this  period,  each  presenting  some  variations 
in  the  county  system,  but  as  it  is  quite  impossible  within 
the  scope  of  a  general  treatment  like  this  to  trace  the  his- 
tory of  local  government  in  each  individual  state,  only 
the  main  tendencies  and  developments  will  be  noted. 

In  the  first  place  there  is  to  be  noted  a  steady  exten- 
sion of  the  elective  principle  for  choosing  county  officers, 
a  continuation  of  the  development  which  marked  the  pre- 
ceding period.  This  development  was  most  marked  with 
regard  to  the  more  purely  judicial  officers  like  county 
judges,  clerks  of  courts,  and  prosecuting  attorneys,  which 


ii2  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

in  general  had  remained  appointive  even  after  the  other 
county  officers  had  become  elective.  The  appointive  sys- 
tem retained  its  hold  chiefly  in  some  of  the  states  of 
the  Old  South,  due  in  some  cases  to  the  desire  to  elim- 
inate the  danger  from  the  votes  of  the  negroes,  theoreti- 
cally enfranchised  by  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  to  the 
Constitution,  and  actually  participating  in  local  govern- 
ment elections  during  the  Reconstruction  Period. 

In  the  same  way  the  reconstruction  period  saw  the  at- 
tempt to  force  upon  some  of  the  Southern  states  the 
township  system  of  the  North  in  place  of  the  "  county- 
district  "  system.  But  this  was  a  temporary  develop- 
ment only,  and  in  subsequent  constitutions  there  was  a 
return  to  the  old  system,  though  the  term  "  township  " 
remained  in  some  cases  to  designate  what  was  in  reality 
a  mere  judicial  and  election  district. 

Among  the  new  states  admitted  to  the  Union  in  the 
territories  of  the  West  during  this  period,  the  township 
government  was  established  in  the  Dakotas,  Nebraska, 
and  Kansas,  the  two  Dakotas  and  Kansas  adopting  the 
"  commissioner  "  type,  while  Nebraska  followed  the  "  su- 
pervisor "  system.  The  states  farther  west,  however, 
did  not  develop  a  township  organization  but  followed  the 
tendency  already  noted  in  the  preceding  period  of  grant- 
ing corporate  powers  to  very  small  communities,  and 
using  the  county  as  the  real  unit  of  local  rural  adminis- 
tration. 

Another  characteristic  of  this  period  was  the  increasing 
attention  devoted  to  local  government  in  the  constitu- 
tions. Whereas,  as  has  been  seen,  the  earliest  state  con- 
stitutions barely  mentioned  local  government,  the  con- 
stitutions of  this  period,  in  which  not  only  new  states 
adopted  constitutions  but  almost  all  existing  states  revised 
their  constitutions  one  or  more  times,  contained  exten- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  113 

sive  constitutional  provisions  relating  to  local  govern- 
ment, both  rural  and  urban.  This  tendency  was  the  con- 
sequence of  the  growing  popular  distrust  of  the  legisla- 
ture which  led  constitutional  conventions  not  only  to  in- 
sert a  host  of  expressed  limitations  on  the  powers  of  the 
legislature  but  also  to  fill  the  constitutions  with  legisla- 
tive details  which  had  formerly  been  left  to  the  legisla- 
tures. With  regard  to  county  government  these  pro- 
visions covered  a  variety  of  subjects  such  as  the  manner 
of  creating  new  counties,  dividing  or  consolidating  exist- 
ing counties,  the  location  of  the  county  seat,  the  enumera- 
tion of  county  officers,  their  qualifications,  terms  of  of- 
fice, and  method  of  selection,  as  well  as  careful  enumera- 
tion of  their  powers  and  duties,  the  taxing  and  borrowing 
powers  of  the  counties,  and  a  prohibition  on  special  legis- 
lation for  counties. 

Finally  may  be  noted  as  a  general  tendency  of  this 
period  the  development  of  a  measure  of  state  administra- 
tive supervision  and  control  over  counties,  to  offset  the 
virtual  independence  of  the  locally  elected  officers,  re- 
garded though  they  were  as  state  officers  and  carrying 
on  chiefly  what  were  considered  as  state  or  general  func- 
tions. Especially  in  the  matter  of  finances  and  educa- 
tion was  a  beginning  made  of  administrative  control, 
though  public  health,  poor  relief,  and  even  highways  were 
to  some  extent  brought  under  the  supervisory  control  of 
state  administrative  boards  or  commissioners,  as  will  be 
seen  later  on. 

Turning  now  to  city  government "  we  find  more  im- 
portant developments  during  this  period  than  in  the  case 
of  county  government.  But  unlike  the  distinguishing 
characteristics  of  county  government,  developments  in 
the  municipal  field  were  not  connected  with  geographical 

11  See  Fairlie,  Municipal  Administration,  pp.  81-102. 


U4  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

sections  of  the  country.  Certain  of  the  developments  of 
this  period  were  nearly  universal  throughout  the  United 
States,  others  were  found  in  a  large  majority  of  the 
states,  still  others  were  discernible  only  here  and  there, 
while,  finally,  some  constituted  exceptions  to  the  general 
situation  but  were  important  as  showing  tendencies  that 
have  become  established  within  the  last  two  decades. 

First  of  all,  then,  may  be  noted  the  fact  that  the  phe- 
nomenon of  urban  concentration,  while  less  marked  in  the 
United  States  than  in  England,  nevertheless  showed  a 
significant  increase  of  intensity  in  this  period.  A  larger 
and  larger  share  of  the  country's  population  was  congre- 
gating in  cities.  Many  new  cities  were  created  and  many 
of  the  existing  cities  took  on  metropolitan  dimensions. 

The  creation  of  new  cities,  which  up  to  1850  had  reg- 
ularly been  accomplished  by  special  legislative  acts  of  in- 
corporation for  each  city,  now  became  the  subject  of 
constitutional  provisions  requiring  the  legislature  to  pro- 
ceed by  general  law  for  the  incorporation  of  cities  and 
forbidding  special  legislation.  Though  these  restrictions 
were  frequently  nullified  as  regards  the  larger  cities, 
which  were  the  very  ones  intended  to  be  pi  tected,  by 
the  device  of  minute  classification,  whereby  laws  general 
in  form  as  to  a  given  class  of  cities  actually  applied  to 
one  city  only,  general  municipal  codes  now  began  to  ap- 
pear. In  four  states,  beginning  with  Missouri  in  1875, 
constitutional  provisions  accorded  to  cities  of  a  certain 
size  the  right  to  frame  their  own  charters,  the  beginning 
of  the  so-called  home-rule  charter  system,  which  during 
the  last  twenty  years  has  been  extended  to  more  than  a 
quarter  of  the  states. 

With  the  increase  in  the  size  of  the  cities  had  come  a 
more  than  corresponding  increase  in  the  activities,  result- 
ing in  enormously  enlarged  expenditures.     Particularly 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  115 

in  the  field  of  public  works,  which  necessitated  enlarged 
borrowing  and  taxing  powers,  was  this  expansion  notice- 
able. As  this  expansion  involved  the  creation  of  large 
city  payrolls  and  the  awarding  of  important  contracts,  or, 
where  the  city  itself  did  not  undertake  to  supply  the 
needed  public  services,  the  grant  of  valuable  franchise 
rights,  the  city  became  the  strategic  ground  for  the  po- 
litical parties  with  their  spoils  system.  Corruption  and 
inefficiency,  therefore,  accompanied  this  era  of  expansion. 
Not  until  towards  the  end  of  the  period  did  municipal 
reform  begin  to  come  into  its  own  and  by  directing  public 
attention  to  the  evils  of  municipal  government  and  point- 
ing out  possible  remedies,  such  as  the  adoption  of  the  civil 
service  merit  program,  and  the  separation  of  general  and 
local  elections,  pave  the  way  for  a  real  improvement  in 
municipal  conditions. 

But  while  the  powers  and  activities  of  cities  in  general 
increased  during  this  period,  the  position  of  the  council 
continually  declined.  As  new  functions  developed  they 
were  in  the  main  entrusted  to  separate  executive  officers  or 
departments  and  not  given  over  to  the  council,  which  had 
begun  to  suffer,  like  its  parent  the  state  legislature,  from 
popular  distrust.  In  some  cases  certain  of  these  func- 
tions were  directly  performed  by  state  boards  or  commis- 
sions. But  gradually  the  tendency  manifested  itself  to 
concentrate  the  administrative  powers  in  the  hands  of  the 
mayor.  He  had  long  had  the  veto  power  and  was  be- 
ginning to  acquire  an  increasing  power  of  appointment 
and  even  of  removal,  after  the  likeness  of  the  national 
executive,  though  the  council  usually  participated  in  one 
or  both  of  these  manifestations  of  administrative  power. 
On  the  organization  side,  therefore,  this  period  may  be 
said  to  have  marked  the  gradual  substitution  of  the  strong 
mayor  type  for  the  conciliar  type  of  city  government. 


u6  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

As  a  legislative  body  we  have  already  seen  in  the  preced- 
ing period  how  the  city  council  had  declined  to  a  position 
of  virtual  impotency  because  of  the  minute  exercise  by 
the  State  legislature  of  its  power  over  local  matters. 

Developments  in  Local  Government  since  1900 

In  the  last  twenty  years  there  have  been  some  interest- 
ing developments  in  the  field  of  county  government  which 
may  be  briefly  noted  here.  Some  of  these  may  fairly  be 
said  to  represent  general  tendencies  while  others  are 
but  isolated  instances.  Some  of  the  latter,  however,  be- 
ing the  result  of  more  or  less  organized  movements,  may 
be  considered  as  having  a  larger  significance  than  would 
at  first  appear  to  be  the  case  if  they  are  viewed  merely  as 
exceptional  variations. 

In  the  first  place  it  may  be  noted  that  the  increasing  at- 
tention paid  to  county  government  in  the  constitutions 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  has  been  a  pretty  steady  develop- 
ment from  the  first,  has  continued  to  make  itself  mani- 
fest in  constitutions  framed  since  1900  as  well  as  in  con- 
stitutional amendments  adopted  since  that  time.  So  the 
Virginia  Constitution  of  1902  contains  a  special  article 
devoted  to  the  organization  and  government  of  counties, 
as  do  also  the  constitutions  of  the  three  new  states  ad- 
mitted since  1900,  Oklahoma,  Arizona,  and  New  Mexico. 

In  the  next  place  may  be  mentioned  a  tendency  in  re- 
cent legislation  to  enlarge  the  scope  of  activities  of  the 
county  beyond  the  long  recognized  functions  already 
enumerated.  This  is  manifested  in  such  activities  as 
public  education,  public  health,  libraries,  parks,  and  the 
improvement  of  agriculture,  etc. 

Thirdly  there  has  been  a  marked  increase  in  the  devel- 
opment of  state  administrative  control,  a  tendency  which 
began,  as  has  been  seen,  in  the  last  half  of  the  nineteenth 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT,  117 

century,  but  which  has  been  accentuated  in  the  last  twenty 
years  in  almost  all  phases  of  county  activity,  notably  in 
the  fields  of  finance,  poor  relief,  health,  highway  matters, 
and  to  a  small  extent  in  police  matters. 

Among  interesting,  though  isolated,  phenomena,  may 
be  noted  the  grant  of  home  rule  to  counties  in  California, 
the  consolidation  of  cities  and  counties,  as  in  California 
and  Colorado,  and  the  extension  of  the  civil  service  merit 
system  to  county  employees  in  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Ohio,  and  locally  in  a  few  other  instances. 

Finally  may  be  noted  a  significant  development  which, 
though  extra-governmental,  has  already  had  a  consider- 
able influence  on  developments  in  the  field  of  county  gov- 
ernment and  is  destined  to  have  an  ever  increasing  one. 
That  is  the  inauguration  of  reform  agencies  specially  in- 
terested in  the  county  problem.  Until  within  a  very  few 
years  practically  no  attention  has  been  devoted  to  the 
study  of  the  county  system  nor  have  systematic  attempts 
at  the  solution  of  its  problems  been  launched.  Now  there 
are  national  associations  like  the  Short  Ballot  Association, 
the  National  Municipal  League,  and  others  emphasizing 
the  county  problem,  and  national  conferences  on  county 
government  are  being  held,  while  such  institutions  as  the 
New  York  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research  and  the  Rus- 
sell Sage  Foundation  are  undertaking  county  surveys. 
State  conferences  on  county  government  and  local  county 
taxpayers'  associations  are  beginning  to  appear  which 
tend  to  focus  public  attention  on  the  obscure  but  impor- 
tant problems  of  county  government,  while  universities 
are  beginning  to  offer  special  courses  in  this  field.  Al- 
though these  developments  are  almost  a  generation  be- 
hind the  mobilization  of  similar  forces  for  the  study  of 
municipal  problems,  they  give  promise  of  exerting  a  like 
influence  on  the  future  evolution  of  county  government. 


u8  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

In  the  field  of  municipal  government  there  have  been 
some  very  significant  new  developments  within  the  past 
twenty  years  as  well  as  a  continuation  of  important  ten- 
dencies noted  in  the  last  half  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

First  of  all,  the  process  of  urban  concentration,  that  is 
the  congregating  of  an  ever  larger  proportion  of  our  na- 
tional population  in  cities,  has  continued  without  abate- 
ment in  the  twentieth  century.  Our  largest  cities  have 
attained  dimensions  equal  to  those  of  the  largest  cities 
of  the  world,  and  the  number  of  cities  of  more  than  a 
hundred  thousand  population  has  increased  in  the  last 
twenty  years  from  thirty-six  ( 1900)  to  sixty-eight 
( 1920).  Corresponding  to  this  increase  in  the  size  of  the 
cities  and  to  the  modern  realization  of  the  obligations  im- 
posed upon  them  to  care  for  their  inhabitants,  the  activi- 
ties of  cities  and  their  expenditures  have  increased  even 
more  rapidly  than  their  population. 

On  the  organization  side  one  of  the  most  important 
developments  of  the  past  twenty  years  has  been  the  spread 
of  the  constitutional  home-rule  charter  system  to  nine 
other  states  and  the  voluntary  grant  to  cities  by  the  leg- 
islatures of  other  states  of  the  right  to  adopt  charters  ac- 
cording to  their  own  wishes. 

Two  new  types  of  city  government  have  made  their 
appearance  in  the  last  two  decades,  commission  govern- 
ment and  the  city  manager  plan,  which  have  supplanted 
the  traditional  mayor-and-council  form  in  some  five  hun- 
dred cities,  chiefly  of  the  smaller  size. 

Independently  of  these  new  types  of  city  government 
there  has  been  progress  in  the  direction  of  divorcing  local 
and  national  political  issues  through  the  adoption  of  non- 
partisan ballots  and  the  separation  of  city  and  general 
elections,  the  more  extended  application  of  the  merit 
■system  of  civil  service,  the  adoption  of  instruments  of  di- 


ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  119 

rect  popular  control  in  the  form  of  the  initiative,  refer- 
endum, and  recall,  and  the  improvement  of  methods  of 
finance  administration. 

These  last  developments  have  in  large  part  been  the 
result  of  an  awakened  popular  interest  in  improved  city 
government  stimulated  and  made  effective  through  the 
same  sort  of  agencies  as  those  mentioned  above  in  con- 
nection with  the  county,  and  antedating  the  latter  by 
nearly  twenty  years. 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  COUNTY  GOVERNMENT  » 

Physical  Characteristics  of  American  Counties. — 

Counties  exist  as  geographical  subdivisions  in  every 
state  in  the  Union  with  the  single  exception  of  Louisiana, 
where  the  corresponding  area  is  called  parish.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Census  of  1910  there  were  in  the  forty-six 
states  and  two  territories  of  continental  United  States 

1  The  most  comprehensive  description  of  county  organization  is 
to  be  found  in  Fairlie,  Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns,  and 
Villages,  Part  II.  The  older  work  of  Howard,  Local  Constitutional 
History,  is  now  too  much  out  of  date  to  be  valuable  except  for  his- 
torical purposes. 

Brief  discussions  of  county  organization  found  in  such  standard 
general  text  books  on  government  as  Beard,  American  Government 
and  Politics,  Third  Ed.  (New  York,  1920),  Chap,  xxix,  and  Munro, 
The  Government  of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1919),  Chap, 
xxxviii,  are  in  the  main  mere  summaries  of  Fairlie's  treatment  cited 
above. 

There  are  a  number  of  studies  of  county  government  in  individual 
states,  many  of  which,  including  the  school  texts  for  the  government 
of  the  various  states,  are  listed  in  the  bibliography  in  Fairlie,  op. 
cit.,  pp.  275-279.  The  most  important  additions  to  this  list  comprise 
papers  in  the  volume  on  "  County  Government"  of  the  Annals  of  the 
American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  XLVII  (May, 
1913),  to  which  should  be  added  Mathewson,  The  County  System 
of  Connecticut  (New  Haven,  1917)  ;  James,  "County  Government 
in  Texas,"  Bulletins  of  the  University  of  Texas  (1917)  ;  and  Maxey, 
County  Administration  (New  York,  1919),  a  study  of  county  admin- 
istration in  Delaware. 

In  recent  years  there  have  appeared  a  number  of  studies  of  indi- 
vidual counties  conducted  by  the  New  York  Bureau  of  Municipal 
Research,  the  Russell  Sage  Foundation,  and  local  civic  bodies  and 
research  bureaus.    A  number  of  these  are  contained  in  the  volume 

120 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      121 

some  2,950  counties,  about  a  hundred  new  counties  hav- 
ing been  created  in  the  ten  preceding  years.  The  process 
of  creating  new  counties  having  continued  in  the  last 
decade,  there  are  now  more  than  three  thousand  such  di- 
visions. The  number  of  counties  in  each  state  varies 
from  three  in  Delaware  to  253  in  Texas,  the  average 
number  being  something  over  sixty.  But  the  variation 
in  the  number  of  counties  in  each  state  corresponds  only 
very  roughly  to  the  variations  in  the  areas  of  the  states. 
In  area  the  counties  varied  in  19 10  2  from  twenty-four 
square  miles  in  Bristol  County,  Rhode  Island,  to  more 
than  twenty  thousand  square  miles  in  San  Bernardino 
County,  California.  The  average  area  of  the  Ameri- 
can county  is  something  over  a  thousand  square  miles,  a 
figure  that  corresponds  very  closely  to  that  of  the  Eng- 
lish counties  and  is  less  than  half  as  large  as  that  of  the 

entitled  Documents  on  County  Government  collected  by  the  National 
Short  Ballot  Organization. 

The  list  of  reports,  pamphlets,  and  articles  on  special  aspects  of 
county  organization  and  administration  is  now  too  formidable  to 
be  reproduced  here.  A  select  bibliography  on  county  government 
taken  from  a  list  prepared  by  the  Library  of  Congress  published 
in  Appendix  II  to  James,  "  County  Government  in  Texas,"  con- 
*  tains  a  comprehensive  list  of  these  articles.  Gilbertson,  The  County 
(New  York,  1917),  also  includes  many  of  these,  in  the  bibliography 
on  pp.  275  fi. 

The  texts  of  state  constitutions  may  be  conveniently  found  in 
Kettleborough,  State  Constitutions  (Indianapolis,  1918),  and  an 
analysis  of  the  constitutional  provisions  relating  to  counties  in 
force  in  1915  may  be  found  in  the  Index  Digest  of  State  Constitu- 
tions prepared  for  the  New  York  State  Constitutional  Convention 
Commission  in  191 5,  pp.  197-292. 

Statutes  relating  to  county  government  are  to  be  found  in  the 
codes,  revised  statutes,  and  session  laws  of  the  several  states.  The 
statistics  as  to  area  and  population  of  counties  are  to  be  found  in 
the  abstract  of  the  Thirteenth  Census  of  the  United  States,  1910. 

2  Not  including  the  sixteen  cities  of  Virginia  which  are  listed 
as  separate  counties,  five  of  which  had  an  area  of  only  one  square 
mile  each. 


122  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

area  of  the  French  departments.3  But  this  average  is 
unduly  affected  by  the  areas  of  the  large  but  sparsely 
settled  counties  in  the  Western  states,  which  are  in  the 
process  of  being  divided  into  smaller  counties  as  popula- 
tion increases.  To  represent  the  typical  county  area,  six 
hundred  square  miles  would  be  a  more  correct  figure, 
the  number  of  counties  with  a  larger  area  than  that  be- 
ing very-  nearly  equal  to  the  number  with  a  smaller  area. 
In  general  the  counties  of  the  newer  states,  especially 
those  admitted  since  1850,  are  considerably  larger  than 
those  of  the  older  states,  and  quite  commonly  the  consti- 
tutions establish  minimum  areas  for  the  creation  of  new 
counties. 

In  population,  the  variations  in  counties  are  even 
greater  than  in  area,  extending  in  191  o  from  sixty-five  in 
Cochran  County,  Texas,  to  more  than  two  million  seven 
hundred  thousand  in  New  York  County,  New  York. 
The  average  population  was  something  over  thirty  thous- 
and, as  compared  with  ten  times  that  figure  in  the  English 
counties  and  fifteen  times  in  the  French  departments. 
But  here  again  the  average  is  misleading  for  the  great 
majority  of  counties  have  a  smaller  population  than  that 
figure,  and  twenty  thousand  would  more  nearly  represent 
the  typical  county.  The  population  of  the  counties 
grouped  by  sections,  varies  roughly  inversely  with  their 
size,  for  the  typical  western  counties  contain  less  than  ten 
thousand  people,  while  the  counties  of  the  North  Atlantic 
states  average  well  over  one  hundred  thousand  people. 

Whether  viewed,  therefore,  from  the  point  of  view 
of  size,  population,  or  density  of  population,  the  Ameri- 
can county  is  very  much  less  important  than  are  the  cor- 
responding areas  in  England  and  France,  a  fact  that  must 
not  be   lost   sight   of   when   instituting  comparisons   or 

3  See  Chap,  i,  pp.  15,  44. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     123 

reaching  conclusions  as  to  the  character  or  scope  of  func- 
tions that  should  be  entrusted  to  the  counties,  especially 
as  these  factors  exercise  a  determining  influence  on  the 
financial  resources  of  these  units. 

From  the  foregoing  description  of  the  physical  fea- 
tures of  the  American  county  it  will  be  readily  seen  that 
it  is  very  difficult  to  make  any  other  than  the  most  gen- 
eral statements  on  this  point  which  will  hold  true  for  any 
considerable  number  of  counties.  Nevertheless  it  may  be 
of  interest  to  note  that  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  dis- 
tribution of  population  in  counties  they  may  be  divided 
into  several  classes  which  will  show  differences  of  real 
importance  in  the  consideration  of  their  governmental 
needs.  First  there  is  the  class  of  rural  counties,  that  is, 
counties  which  contain  no  cities  of  any  magnitude,  even 
the  county  seat,  which  is  generally  the  largest  urban  com- 
munity in  the  county,  scarcely  attaining  a  population  of 
five  thousand.  This  class  includes  by  far  the  greatest 
number  of  counties  and  may  be  regarded  as  the  typical 
case,  though  with  the  continuing  concentration  of  popula- 
tion in  urban  centers  and  the  general  increase  in  popula- 
tion, the  number  of  counties  in  this  class  will  necessarily 
decline.  In  the  next  class  may  be  grouped  those  coun- 
ties in  which  there  are  one  or  more  cities  of  considerable 
size,  let  us  say  of  twenty-five  thousand  inhabitants  or 
more,  the  county  seat  being  usually  among  such  cities. 
According  to  the  iqio  census  there  were  229  such  cases. 
Most  of  these  cities  are  the  only  cities  of  twenty-five 
thousand  or  more  inhabitants  within  their  counties, 
though  in  Connecticut,  Massachusetts,  New  Jersey,  New 
York,  and  Rhode  Island,  there  were  counties  containing  as 
many  as  three  cities  of  this  population.  Even  where 
there  was  only  one  such  city  in  the  county,  the  general 
rule  in  this  class  of  counties,  this  city  usually  comprised 


124  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

more  than  one-half  of  the  population  of  the  county,  but 
only  a  small  part  of  the  area.  Of  the  fifteen  largest  cities 
in  the  United  States  in  1910,  New  York  City  comprised 
five  counties  within  the  corporate  limits,  Philadelphia, 
St.  Louis,  Baltimore,  San  Francisco,  and  New  Orleans 
had  identical  boundaries  for  city  and  county,  and  the 
nine  others  contained  a  percentage  of  the  population  of 
the  county  in  which  they  were  located  varying  from  52 
per  cent  in  Pittsburgh  to  90  per  cent  in  Chicago. 

A  third  class  of  counties,  less  numerous  than  the  first 
but  more  numerous  than  the  second,  comprises  those  in 
which  there  are  several  cities  smaller  than  twenty-five 
thousand  in  population  but  nevertheless  presenting  urban 
conditions  and  interests  distinct  from  those  of  the  strictly 
rural  portions  of  the  county.  This  situation,  which  pre- 
sents some  governmental  problems  of  its  own,  is  met  with 
very  generally  in  the  more  thickly  populated  states,  and 
is  likely  to  become  more  and  more  common  with  the  in- 
creasing urban  concentration.  In  New  York,  for  in- 
stance, there  were  in  19 10  127  incorporated  places  of 
between  2,500  and  25,000  inhabitants  in  the  sixty-one 
counties;  in  Pennsylvania  243  such  places  in  sixty-seven 
counties ;  and  in  New  Jersey  74  in  twenty-one,  or  on  an 
average  more  than  three  such  incorporated  places  in  each 
county. 

The  Creation  and  Abolition  of  Counties. —  Turning 
now  from  the  geographic  and  demographic  characteris- 
tics of  counties  to  the  manner  of  their  creation,  it  is  to 
be  noted  first,  that  the  creation,  alteration,  and  termina- 
tion of  counties  lies  within  the  lawmaking  power  of  the 
states,  except  so  far  as  limited  by  the  constitution.  At 
first  there  were  no  such  limitations  inserted  in  the  state 
constitutions,  but,  owing  in  part  to  the  abuse  of  this  power 
for  political  purposes  by  the  legislatures,  state  constitu- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     125 

tions  now  quite  commonly  contain  such  limitations.4 
In  the  first  place  the  constitution  itself  may,  as  in 
Georgia,  name  the  existing  counties  without  reserving 
to  the  legislature  the  power  to  create  new  counties,  in 
which  case  constitutional  amendments  are  required  to 
create  new  counties.  But  that  is  distinctly  an  exception, 
for  while  most  constitutions  name  the  existing  counties 
as  election  districts  for  the  legislature  and  as  judicial  dis- 
tricts, they  expressly  permit  the  creation  of  new  counties 
by  the  legislature. 

The  power  to  create  new  counties  is  limited  in  a  num- 
ber of  states  by  a  variety  of  qualifications.  Firstly,  half 
a  dozen  constitutions  insist  that  the  creation  of  new  coun- 
ties shall  be  by  general  and  not  special  law.  Secondly, 
an  equal  number  require  the  approval  of  a  majority  or 
more  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  territory  to  be  created  a 
county.  Thirdly,  half  of  the  state  constitutions  specify  a 
minimum  area  for  new  counties.  This  minimum  figure 
varies  from  275  square  miles  in  Tennesse  to  900  in  Texas, 
but  the  majority  of  these  constitutions,  including  states 
in  every  portion  of  the  Union,  prescribe  four  hundred 
miles,  or  about  that,  as  the  minimum  area. 

Fourthly,  sixteen  constitutions  prescribe  a  minimum 
population  for  new  counties  varying  from  700  in  Ten- 
nessee to  20,000  in  Pennsylvania,  some  of  them  requir- 
ing a  population  sufficient  to  entitle  it  to  a  representative 
in  the  legislature  on  the  basis  of  the  existing  ratio. 
Fifthly,  four  constitutions  prescribe  minimum  tax  val- 
ues of  from  a  million  to  two  and  a  half  million  dollars. 
Sixthly,  half  a  dozen  constitutions  forbid  lines  of  new 
counties  to  run  within  a  specified  distance  of  the  county 
seat  of  existing  counties. 

4  See  Index  Digest  of  State  Constitutions,  "  Counties,''  pp.  197- 
213. 


126  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Another  feature  of  county  constitution  that  is  made 
the  subject  of  express  limitations  on  the  legislature  in  a 
number  of  state  constitutions  is  the  matter  of  change  of 
boundaries.  Half  a  dozen  or  more  constitutions  require 
a  general  law,  and  a  larger  number  insist  on  approval 
by  the  voters  of  the  portion  to  be  taken  from  an  existing 
county  and  added  to  another  county,  while  in  some  cases 
approval  of  the  county  to  which  the  territory  is  to  be 
added  is  required.  Restrictions  as  to  the  minimum  area 
of  the  old  county  from  which  portions  are  to  be  taken  off 
are  somewhat  similar  to  the  provisions  with  regard  to 
the  minimum  area  of  new  counties  noted  above,  and  the 
prohibition  against  cutting  counties  within  a  specified 
distance  of  the  county  seat  of  the  old  county  is  also  found 
in  some  states. 

When  new  counties  are  created  out  of  old  counties, 
or  portions  of  one  county  are  added  to  another,  a  num- 
ber of  constitutions  require  that  the  severed  portion  shall 
be  liable  for  its  proportion  of  the  indebtedness  of  the  old 
county,  but  only  three  constitutions  assure  to  such  sev- 
ered portion  its  share  of  the  assets  of  the  county  from 
which  it  was  taken. 

The  location  and  removal  of  county  seats  being  one 
of  the  aspects  of  county  organization  in  which  improper 
political  considerations  proved  to  play  an  undue  part  in 
determining  the  action  of  the  legislature,  these  matters 
have  been  made  the  subject  of  constitutional  limitations 
in  three-fourths  of  the  states.  The  commonest  limitation 
in  this  regard  is  the  prohibition  against  local  or  special 
legislation,  but  over  half  of  the  constitutions  also  require 
approval  of  the  local  electorate,  frequently  requiring  an 
extraordinary  majority,  and  limiting  the  intervals  at 
which  proposals  to  change  the  county  seat  may  be  sub- 
mitted. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     127 

Finally,  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  abolish  coun- 
ties has  been  limited  by  constitutional  provisions  in  a 
few  states,  requiring  the  approval  of  the  electors  both 
of  the  counties  to  be  abolished  and  of  the  counties  to 
which  the  territory  is  to  be  added. 

All  these  constitutional  provisions,  and  this  is  true  of 
many  other  of  the  constitutional  provisions  relating  to 
local  government,  have  a  larger  significance  than  might 
appear  merely  from  a  consideration  of  the  number  of 
states  in  which  they  exist,  for  they  represent  general 
principles  prevalent  with  regard  to  county  organization 
which  have  been  followed  by  legislatures  voluntarily  in 
many  of  the  states  in  which  they  are  not  established  on 
a  constitutional  basis. 

General  Features  of  County  Administration. — 
With  regard  to  the  officers  of  the  American  county  cer- 
tain general  features  can  also  be  discovered  in  the  con- 
stitutional provisions  regarding  them,  particularly  in  the 
later  constitutions  which  have  shown  the  general  ten- 
dency to  go  into  legislative  detail  in  this  regard  as  in 
others.  In  part  these  provisions,  like  those  with  regard 
to  area,  population,  boundaries,  etc.,  considered  above, 
were  inserted  for  the  purpose  of  limiting  the  power  of 
abuse  involved  in  the  otherwise  unrestricted  right  of  the 
legislative  branch  of  the  government  to  deal  with  coun- 
ties. In  part,  however,  they  represent  a  crystallization 
of  what  was  considered  the  best  legislative  practice  at 
the  time  they  were  inserted,  and  so  they  tended  both  to 
make  permanent  the  features  which  were  then  approved 
and  to  serve  as  models  for  constitutional  and  legal  pro- 
visions in  other  states.  In  this  connection  it  is  well  to 
point  out  the  obvious  fact  that  this  tendency  toward 
minute  constitutional  provisions  concerning  county  gov- 
ernment is  one  of  the  great  hindrances  in  the  way  of 


128  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

needed  reforms,  owing  to  the  general  difficulties  involved 
in  the  process  of  constitutional  amendment.  Particularly 
is  this  true,  when,  as  is  the  case  generally  with  regard  to 
proposed  reforms  in  this  field,  the  general  public  is  prac- 
tically not  informed  on  or  interested  in  the  existing  weak- 
nesses, whereas  the  well  organized  political  forces  fre- 
quently have  a  selfish  interest  in  perpetuating  the  existing 
regime. 

An  examination  of  the  constitutional  provisions  with 
regard  to  county  officers,  discloses  that  in  fully  one-half 
of  them  provisions  are  found  relating  to  the  composition 
and  functions  of  an  authority  for  the  management  of 
county  affairs,  called  variously  the  county  court,  the 
county  board,  the  board  of  commissioners,  the  board  of 
supervisors,  or  in  one  case,  Georgia,  the  ordinary,  who  in 
that  state  acts  as  the  county  authority.  Some  thirty  state 
constitutions  provide  that  there  shall  be  courts  for  each 
county,  variously  called  county,  probate,  superior,  or  or- 
phans' courts,  with  one  or  more  judges  for  each.  More 
than  three-fourths  of  the  state  constitutions  provide  for 
a  sheriff  in  each  county,  to  be  elected  in  every  case  by 
the  voters  of  the  county,  and  a  number  of  the  constitu- 
tions contain  provisions  as  to  the  qualifications,  term  of 
office,  manner  of  removal,  etc.,  of  this  officer. 

Besides  the  constitutional  establishment  of  county 
boards,  county  courts,  and  sheriffs  in  a  majority  of  the 
states,  there  is  a  long  list  of  county  officers  established 
by  the  various  constitutions,  some  of  which,  like  the  cor- 
oner, are  prescribed  in  a  majority  of  the  states,  others  ap- 
pearing in  a  few  constitutions  or  in  a  single  constitution 
only.  This  list  includes,  among  the  more  general  of- 
ficers, besides  those  named  above,  assessors,  auditors, 
clerks  of  courts,  county  clerks,  collectors,  recorders,  sur- 
veyors,   treasurers,    and    superintendents    of    schools. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     129 

With  regard  to  these  county  officers,  as  well  as  with  re- 
gard to  county  officers  to  be  created  by  the  legislature 
many  of  the  constitutions  contain  express  stipulations  as  to 
qualifications,  method  of  selection,  official  bonds,  com- 
pensation, term,  removal,  and  the  filling  of  vacancies. 
The  prevalent  method  of  selection  for  most  of  the  county 
offices  specified  in  the  constitutions  is  election  by  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  county.  Half  of  the  state  con- 
stitutions require  the  office  of  prosecuting  attorney  in 
each  county,  under  a  variety  of  names,  to  be  elected,  in 
the  majority  of  cases,  by  the  voters  of  the  county. 

Many  of  these  constitutional  provisions  with  regard 
to  county  officers  are  reproduced  by  legislation  in  many 
of  the  states  which  do  not  include  them  in  their  consti- 
tutions, and  are  therefore  fairly  descriptive  of  the  sys- 
tem of  county  officers  established  in  the  United  States. 

The  term  of  office  for  county  officers  is  fixed  in  a 
number  of  constitutions  at  a  period  varying  from  two  to 
eight  years,  the  shorter  term  being  quite  general  in  the 
western  states.  Four-year  terms  are  prescribed  in  a 
number  of  Southern  states,  while  Virginia  specifies  a 
term  of  eight  years  for  the  county  clerk,  but  four  years 
for  other  county  officers.  This  plan  of  having  varying 
terms  for  different  county  officers  is  not  uncommon, 
though  in  a  number  of  constitutions,  particularly  in  the 
Western  states,  the  constitution  fixes  a  period,  commonly 
two  years,  for  all  county  officers  alike. 

Most  county  officers  are  still  paid  by  the  fee  system 
but  a  few  state  constitutions  in  the  West  have  prescribed 
salaries  for  county  officers  in  place  of  fees,  and  this  move- 
ment has  been  followed  by  similar  legislation  in  other 
states. 

Elective  county  officers  are  usually  removable  after  trial 
by  the  superior  courts  for  neglect  of  duty  or  malfeasance 


130  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

in  office,  or  for  conviction  of  crime.  In  a  few  states 
the  Governor  is  given  authority  to  remove  county  officers 
and  the  constitutions  of  ten  states  make  county  officers, 
except  judges,  subject  to  recall. 

The  electoral  qualifications  for  voting  for  county  of- 
ficers are,  in  general,  the  same  as  those  for  state  officers 
and  are  to  be  found  for  the  most  part  in  the  constitutions 
themselves.  A  residence  within  the  county  is  specified 
in  most  of  the  constitutions,  varying  from  thirty  days  to 
one  year.  Adult  manhood  suffrage,  extended  to  include 
woman  suffrage  in  more  than  a  third  of  the  states  by 
constitutional  amendment  and  in  others  by  legislation 
to  non-constitutional  offices,  with  educational  qualifica- 
tions in  a  number  of  the  states,  is  the  almost  universal 
rule.  With  the  adoption  of  the  Nineteenth  Amendment 
suffrage  distinctions  based  on  sex  have  now,  of  course, 
disappeared.  Property  and  taxpaying  qualifications 
which  were  formerly  universal  have  now  all  but  disap- 
peared, though  a  dozen  states  permit  or  require  the  pay- 
ment of  a  poll  tax  as  a  condition  precedent  to  voting. 

Finally  it  may  be  noted  that  a  number  of  state  con- 
stitutions contain  prohibitions  on  local  or  special  laws 
with  regard  to  county  organization  and  officers,  though 
classification  of  counties  for  purposes  of  legislation  is 
expressly  permitted  in  some  of  the  states  and  is  resorted 
to  in  others  in  virtual  nullification  of  the  constitutional 
provisions. 

The  County  Board 

Types  of  County  Boards. —  Among  the  multitude  of 
county  officers  now  found  by  constitutional  and  legisla- 
tive provision  in  the  various  states  of  the  Union  there  is 
in  every  state,  a  general  authority  to  which  are  entrusted 
more  extensive  powers  than  are  accorded  to  any  of  the 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     131 

other  officers,  as  the  duties  of  these  others  are  for  the 
most  part  restricted  to  one  particular  phase  of  adminis- 
trative activity.  This  authority  is  commonly  entrusted 
with  the  "  management  of  county  affairs  "  or  the  "  trans- 
action of  county  business,''  but  this  general  designation 
serves  rather  to  distinguish  the  nature  of  this  authority 
from  that  of  the  special  officers  than  to  define  its  powers, 
for  these  are  limited  none  the  less  to  those  specifically  en- 
trusted to  it,  which,  as  will  be  seen,  show  considerable 
variations  in  the  different  states.  If,  however,  powers 
are  conferred  upon  the  county  and  not  entrusted  to  desig- 
nated officials,  it  would  seem  that  they  would  reside  in 
the  general  county  authority. 

It  is  to  be  noted  in  the  first  place  that  this  general 
county  authority  is  the  representative  body  of  the  elec- 
tors of  the  county,  especially  chosen,  except  in  a  few 
states,  for  this  purpose.  These  exceptions  include  chiefly 
Connecticut,  where  the  members  of  the  county  board  are 
chosen  by  the  legislature,  Georgia,  where  the  "  ordinary  " 
or  elective  probate  judge  is  given  these  general  powers, 
and  a  few  states  where  the  original  English  and  colonial 
institution  of  constituting  the  justices  of  the  peace  in 
quarter  sessions  the  general  county  authority  is  still  to 
be  found. 

This  general  elective  county  representative  body  is 
variously  designated  the  county  board,  the  board  of 
county  commissioners,  the  board  of  supervisors,  the 
county  court,  the  levy  court,  the  fiscal  court,  and  the  com- 
missioners' court.5  In  the  manner  of  their  composition 
there  are  still  clearly  distinguishable  the  two  main  sys- 
tems which  developed  in  colonial  times,  commonly  desig- 
nated as  the  "  commissioner  "  and  "  supervisor  "  types, 
although  these  designations  are  no  longer  accurate  owing 

6  In  Louisiana  it  is  called  the  police  jury. 


1 32  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

to  a  discrepancy  between  the  terms  applied  to  the  boards 
and  the  manner  of  their  composition  in  various  states. 
But  on  the  basis  of  their  composition  they  can  be  divided 
into  those  that  are  composed  of  representatives  of  the 
subordinate  divisions  of  the  county  existing  for  purposes 
of  local  government,  and  those  that  are  composed  of  rep- 
resentatives of  the  electors  of  the  county,  whether  chosen 
at  large  or  in  special  districts  constituted  for  this  pur- 
pose. Much  the  largest  number  of  states  have  county 
boards  constituted  on  the  second  plan,  which  was  the  orig- 
inal Pennsylvania  plan,  the  representation  of  local  gov- 
ernment units  on  the  county  board,  which  was  originated 
in  New  York,  having  spread  to  relatively  few  other  states. 
But  the  constitutions  of  eight  states  assure  to  the  county 
electorate  a  local  option  on  the  question  of  adopting  one  or 
the  other  of  these  types. 

Where  the  county  board  is  constituted  on  the  plan  of 
representation  of  the  county  electors,  whether  chosen  at 
large  or  by  special  districts,  it  is  usually  a  small  body  of 
from  three  to  seven  members.  Where  it  is  made  up  of 
representatives  of  the  townships,  the  number  will  vary 
from  an  equally  small  number  to  as  many  as  fifty,  de- 
pending on  the  population,  and  especially  on  the  density 
of  the  population  of  the  county,  which  determines  in  a 
measure  the  number  of  subordinate  units  to  be  repre- 
sented. Twenty  to  twenty-five  members  is  perhaps  the 
average  size  of  the  boards  of  supervisors.  But  it  is  to  be 
noted  that  this  method  of  representation  easily  can  and 
frequently  does  result  in  very  unequal  representation, 
since  the  population  of  the  units  is  very  unequal  and  ur- 
ban units  are  at  a  disadvantage  as  compared  with  rural 
districts. 

The  term  of  office  of  the  members  of  the  county  board 
is  usually  either  two  or  four  years,  the  shorter  period 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     133 

being  common  in  the  states  west  of  the  Mississippi. 
Members  of  the  board  generally  receive  a  per  diem, 
though  in  some  cases  a  salary  is  paid  and  in  a  few 
others  the  members  receive  fees  for  their  services. 

Which  of  these  two  general  types  of  composition  of 
the  county  board  is  the  most  satisfactory  will  depend 
somewhat  on  the  nature  of  the  duties  entrusted  to  this 
authority.  If  it  is  chiefly  an  administrative  rather  than 
a  deliberative  body,  it  is  obviously  too  large.  If  it  has 
important  deliberative  or  legislative  functions,  the  small 
number  of  three  commissioners,  originally  provided  in 
Pennsylvania  and  adopted  in  a  considerable  number  of 
other  states  following  this  plan,  would  be  too  small  to 
secure  adequate  representation.  But  the  modern  ten- 
dency towards  a  reduction  in  the  size  of  city  councils 
even  for  the  larger  cities,  would  seem  to  indicate  that  the 
county  board  need  not  be  large  in  order  to  insure  ade- 
quate representation  even  when  a  considerable  measure 
of  legislative  power  is  conferred  on  a  unit  of  local  gov- 
ernment. As  -compared,  however,  with  the  representa- 
tive bodies  of  the  French  department,  namely,  the  gen- 
eral councils  of  the  prefecture,  even  the  boards  of  su- 
pervisors are  not  more  numerous,  nor  will  they  average 
in  number  half  as  many  as  the  councils  of  the  English 
administrative  counties. 

One  of  the  striking  features  of  these  American  county 
boards  is  the  absence  of  any  chief  executive  officer.  Al- 
though in  this  regard  the  American  county  is  like  the 
English  county,  this  lack  is  the  more  striking  in  the 
United  States  since  not  only  the  national  government 
and  the  state  governments,  but  even  city  government,  in 
imitation,  as  has  been  seen,  of  the  other  units,  were  or- 
ganized on  the  principle  of  the  separation  of  powers  which 
lodged  the  chief  executive  power  in  the  hands  of  an  in- 


134  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

dividual  instead  of  a  composite  body.  The  explanation 
of  this  variation  from  the  general  governmental  theory 
in  this  country  is  undoubtedly  to  be  found  in  the  fact 
that  counties  in  the  United  States  were  from  the  first 
and  still  are  to-day  considered  primarily  as  units  of  state 
administration,  not  as  areas  with  local  needs,  and  there- 
fore subordinate  legislative  powers  were  not  conferred 
on  them  as  was  done  in  the  case  of  incorporated  urban 
areas.  There  being  virtually  no  local  legislative  powers 
to  perform  by  the  county  authorities,  there  was,  therefore, 
no  room  for  the  application  of  the  doctrine  of  the  separa- 
tion of  powers  in  the  county  board.  With  the  development 
however,  of  legislative  or  at  least  quasi-legislative  powers 
in  the  county,  involved  in  the  levying  of  taxes,  the  under- 
taking of  public  works,  and  the  establishment  and  man- 
agement of  county  institutions  on  an  increasing  scale, 
as  well  as  a  limited  ordinance  power,  the  need  for  an 
officer  of  the  county  board  with  special  executive  powers 
began  here  and  there  to  make  itself  felt  and  was  met  in 
a  few  instances,  notably  in  New  Jersey  and  Cook  County, 
Illinois.  In  a  few  Southern  states,6  it  is  true,  the  county 
judge  figures  in  a  varying  degree  as  the  chief  officer  of 
the  county  administrative  authority,  but  not  primarily  as 
a  result  of  the  recognition  of  the  need  of  a  chief  county 
executive  officer. 

The  Powers  of  the  County  Board. —  Turning  now 
to  the  scope  of  authority  conferred  on  these  county  boards 
we  find  the  greatest  variations  not  only  in  the  different 
states,  but  also,  owing  to  the  fact  that  special  legisla- 
tion with  regard  to  counties  has  not  been  as  effectively 
forbidden  as  in  the  case  of  cities,  among  the  counties 
within  a  given  state.7 

6  Georgia,  Arkansas,  Texas,  and  Alabama. 

7  The  powers  and  functions  exercised  by  county  officers  are  taken 
up  more  in  detail  in  Chap.  iv. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     135 

First  may  be  considered  the  legislative  powers  of  the 
county  board.  These  are  practically  limited  to  the  power 
of  levying  taxes  and  appropriating  moneys  for  the  pur- 
poses authorized  by  law.  With  but  very  few  exceptions 
the  county  boards  in  all  states  exercise  this  power,  which 
from  the  point  of  view  of  the  taxpayers  of  the  county 
is  the  most  important  of  their  powers.  This  is  in  its  na- 
ture a  legislative  power  which  makes  it  important  that 
the  body  exercising  it  should  be  constituted  on  a  repre- 
sentative basis.  The  limitations  imposed  by  constitutions 
on  this  taxing  power  will  be  considered  later  on. 

Closely  related  to  the  power  to  levy  taxes  is  the  power 
to  borrow  money  for  specific  purposes,  which  appears  in 
the  constitutions  of  many  states  in  the  form  of  limita- 
tions on  the  amount,  purposes,  and  manner  of  contract- 
ing debts  which  can  be  authorized  by  the  legislatures. 

Much  of  the  money  raised  by  taxation  or  by  means  of 
loans  is  levied  by  specific  taxes  the  proceeds  of  which  are 
applicable  only  to  the  purpose  for  which  they  were  raised. 
But  there  is  also  usually  a  general  county  fund  from 
which  money  may  be  appropriated  for  a  variety  of  pur- 
poses, and  this  appropriation  is  the  complementary  legis- 
lative function  of  the  county  board. 

The  purposes  for  which  money  can  be  raised  and  ex- 
pended are  so  varied  in  different  states  that  it  is  difficult 
to  make  any  statements  that  are  even  generally  true. 
But  among  those  purposes,  generically  known  as  "  county 
purposes,"  certain  ones  are  very  generally  found.  So 
the  power,  which  is  at  the  same  time  a  legal  duty,  to  con- 
struct county  buildings,  especially  courthouses  and  jails, 
is  almost  universal.  Scarcely  less  general  is  the  power 
of  the  county  to  construct  roads  and  bridges,  though  the 
extent  of  that  power  is  affected  by  the  extent  of  the  duties 
imposed  upon  subordinate  divisions  of  the  county  in  this 


136  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

regard.  Less  extensive  is  the  power  accorded  to  coun- 
ties to  construct  other  public  buildings  such  as  poor 
houses,  asylums,  and  more  recently  hospitals  and  libraries, 
while  other  public  works  such  as  irrigation  works,  drain- 
age works,  levees,  and  similar  public  utilities  are  in  some 
cases  entrusted  to  counties  in  those  states  in  which  these 
improvements  are  most  needed.  Poor  relief  is  another 
common  county  purpose  which,  like  the  construction  of 
roads,  dates  back  to  the  earliest  counties.  To  these  func- 
tions may  be  added  expenditures  for  school  purposes  and 
more  recently  for  public  health  purposes.  Finally  the 
county  boards  provide  the  salaries  for  such  of  the  county 
officers  as  are  salaried. 

Aside  from  these  powers  of  raising  and  appropriating 
revenues,  some  additional  ordinance  powers  are  some- 
times lodged  in  the  county  boards.  So  four  or  five  state 
constitutions  expressly  authorize  the  legislature  to  con- 
fer on  the  county  boards  a  local  ordinance  power,  and 
at  least  three  state  constitutions  8  confer  express  power 
on  counties  to  "  make  and  enforce  within  (their)  limits 
such  local,  police,  sanitary,  and  other  regulations  as  are 
not  in  conflict  with  general  laws,"  while  the  Maryland 
constitution  lodges  in  the  councils  of  counties  acting 
under  the  home-rule  amendment  full  powers  to  enact 
local  laws  in  conformity  with  an  express  grant  of  powers 
to  be  made  by  the  legislature.  Five  state  constitutions 
make  express  mention  of  the  power  of  county  authorities 
to  grant  public  utility  franchises.  But  in  spite  of  these 
express  constitutional  authorizations,  which,  however,  are 
not  necessary  in  order  to  enable  the  legislatures  to  confer 
powers  of  local  legislation  on  county  boards,  the  long 
established  tradition  of  American  state  legislatures  to 
deal  in  great  detail  with  matters  of  local  government  has 

8  California,  Idaho,  and  Washington. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     137 

operated  to  limit  the  legislative  powers  of  county  boards, 
in  the  vast  majority  of  cases,  practically  to  the  financial 
powers  discussed  above.  Herein  lies  one  of  the  main  dis- 
tinctions between  the  county  representative  bodies  and 
those  of  the  incorporated  urban  units,  for  while  the 
former  have  very  limited  legislative  powers,  the  latter 
are  usually  entrusted  with  a  considerable  amount  of  local 
ordinance  power. 

Fundamental  among  the  questions  relating  to  county 
government  is  the  one  as  to  the  extent  of  local  legislative 
powers  that  should  be  granted  to  the  county.  This  is 
a  question  that  arises  more  naturally  in  connection  with 
the  discussion  of  county  functions  in  the  next  chapter 
and  will  be  taken  up  there.  But,  as  has  already  been 
pointed  out,  it  has  an  important  bearing  on  the  question 
of  the  composition  of  the  governing  authority  of  the 
county.  For  a  policy  determining  body  the  important 
consideration  is  to  make  it  truly  representative,  while  for 
a  purely  administrative  authority  wieldiness  and  concen- 
tration of  authority  are  fundamental. 

Much  more  extensive  than  the  legislative  powers  of 
the  county  boards  are  their  administrative  functions. 
These  fall  into  a  variety  of  classes,  some  of  which  are 
very  generally  found  lodged  in  the  county  boards,  others 
only  met  with  here  and  there.  Perhaps  the  most  general 
of  these  powers  is  that  of  authorizing  the  disbursing  of 
the  county  funds  in  accordance  with  the  appropriations. 
The  power  to  allow  claims  against  the  county  partakes 
somewhat  of  a  judicial  character,  but,  coupled  with  the 
power  of  making  appropriations  and  entering  into  con- 
tracts, it  results  in  the  county  board  having  complete  con- 
trol over  the  raising  and  spending  of  moneys  virtually 
without  any  check.  A  considerable  number  of  states 
provide  county  auditors,  as  will  be  seen,  but  they  do  not, 


138  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

except  in  rare  instances,  act  as  comptrollers,  that  is  they 
do  not  examine  into  the  legality  and  propriety  of  pay- 
ments before  they  are  made  but  rather  merely  check  the 
accounts  at  regular  intervals  after  the  expenditures. 

Another  common  administrative  function  of  the  county 
boards  is  the  control  over  the  county  property.  This 
includes  the  care  and  repair  of  the  courthouses,  jails  and 
poorhouses,  as  well  as  the  repair  of  the  county  roads 
and  bridges.  With  the  tendency  now  apparent  of  in- 
creasing the  number  of  county  institutions  to  include  hos- 
pitals and  libraries  this  phase  of  the  activity  of  county 
boards  seems  destined  to  increase. 

In  connection  with  the  conduct  of  elections  county 
boards  are  commonly  charged  with  the  duty  of  canvassing 
and  making  returns.  In  a  number  of  states  also  the 
county  boards  exercise  a  limited  licensing  power. 

Most  of  the  important  county  officers  being  indepen- 
dently elected  the  county  boards  have  only  a  very  limited 
appointing  power.  Some  of  the  officers  which  they  are 
permitted  or  directed  to  provide,  such  as  road  officers, 
health  officers,  and  superintendents  of  county  institutions, 
are  within  the  appointing  powers  of  the  board,  but  they 
are  not  usually  very  important  or  attractive  positions. 

In  the  same  way  the  county  board  has  only  a  very  slight 
administrative  authority  over  the  subordinate  divisions 
in  the  county.  In  many  states,  it  is  true,  they  may  estab- 
lish districts  within  the  county,  but  except  in  a  few  in- 
stances where  they  exercise  some  control  over  the  local 
finances  their  supervisory  powers  are  very  limited.  Per- 
haps the  most  general  of  these  powers  is  that  of  equaliz- 
ing the  tax  assessments  for  county  purposes  made  by  the 
authorities  of  the  minor  divisions  of  the  county. 

Keeping  in  mind  the  fact  that  there  are  the  greatest 
variations  in  the  position  of  the  county  boards  in  different 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     139 

states,  it  is  generally  true  that  except  in  the  metropolitan 
counties  the  post  of  county  commissioner  is  not  attractive 
either  from  the  point  of  view  of  compensation  or  influ- 
ence. It  does  not  loom  large  in  the  public  imagination 
and  yet  it  makes  considerable  demands  on  the  time  of  the 
incumbent.  In  consequence  it  is  very  likely  to  be  filled 
by  men  of  inferior  caliber,  and  even  to  the  professional 
politician  it  does  not  figure  as  a  stepping  stone  to  more  im- 
portant positions.  The  positions  are,  therefore,  likely 
to  be  awarded  to  the  distinctly  subordinate  political  work- 
ers who  have  established  some  claim  upon  the  county 
boss  or  machine.  The  place  of  the  county  in  the  political 
party  organization,  and  the  reflex  of  this  position  on 
county  government,  have  already  been  touched  upon  in  the 
treatment  of  the  historical  development  of  the  county  and 
will  be  referred  to  again  in  various  connections. 

Judicial  Officers 

The  County  Judge. —  The  county,  in  the  great  major- 
ity of  the  states,  is  a  district  for  the  selection  of  judges. 
But  the  title,  jurisdiction,  and  functions  of  these  judges 
vary  greatly  in  the  different  states  and  also  in  the  va- 
rious counties  within  a  single  state.  With  the  exception 
of  the  New  England  states  these  judges  are  almost  uni- 
versally elected  by  popular  vote.  In  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  states  there  are  judges  known  as  county  judges, 
sometimes  as  the  only  judge  elected  in  the  county,  some- 
times in  addition  to  other  judges.  In  a  few  states  there 
are  judges  elected  for  smaller  divisions  than  the  county, 
but  generally  speaking  the  county  is  the  smallest  division 
in  which  judges,  other  than  the  justices  of  the  peace,  are 
chosen.  In  many  of  the  states,  on  the  other  hand,  coun- 
ties are  grouped  into  districts  for  the  election  of  district 
or  circuit  court  judges,  but  even  in  these  states  the  larger 


i4o  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

counties  commonly  constitute  such  districts  for  them- 
selves and  may  elect  in  addition  to  the  county  judge  a 
judge  for  the  higher  court.  In  many  of  the  states  where 
there  is  no  regular  system  of  county  courts  there  are 
special  probate  courts  with  judges  elected  in  each  county. 

County  judges  are  usually  invested  with  a  limited  origi- 
nal civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction,  an  appellate  jurisdic- 
tion over  the  justices  of  the  peace,  and  probate  jurisdic- 
tion. In  some  states,  as  has  been  seen,  the  county  judges 
exercise  in  addition  to  their  judicial  functions  an  admin- 
istrative authority,  a  survival  of  the  original  position  of 
the  county  court  in  colonial  times,  and  in  a  very  few  cases 
the  county  judges  have  purely  non-judicial  functions. 
Not  all  the  states  having  county  judges,  even  when  these 
exercise  a  considerable  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction, 
require  any  special  qualifications  in  the  way  of  legal 
training  for  the  office.  Their  term  of  office  varies  from 
two  to  six  years.  They  are  commonly  paid  a  salary, 
though  in  some  instances  the  remuneration  is  per  diem 
or  by  fees. 

Where  the  judges  chosen  in  each  county  are  the  judges 
of  superior  courts  or  courts  of  general  jurisdiction  they 
are  generally  required  to  be  attorneys  of  a  certain  number 
of  years  standing,  receive  a  higher  compensation,  and 
serve  for  longer  terms  than  do  the  county  judges.  They 
can  usually  act  also  in  other  districts  than  the  one  for 
which  they  are  elected. 

The  county  judges,  even  where  their  functions  are  pri- 
marily or  wholly  judicial,  are,  as  has  been  seen,  almost 
everywhere  elective.  The  question  of  the  expediency  of 
choosing  these  officers  by  popular  election  stands  on  the 
same  footing,  so  far  as  they  are  judicial  officers,  as  that 
of  the  general  merits  of  popular  election  of  judges.  This 
method  of  selecting  judges  even   for  the  highest  state 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     141 

courts  is  the  prevailing  one  in  the  United  States.  It  is, 
however,  rather  the  result  of  that  general  tendency  to 
make  all  public  officers  elective  which  characterized  the  de- 
velopments in  the  first  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  in 
the  United  States,  than  of  a  deliberate  conviction  that 
judges  as  such  should  be  elective.  On  the  principle  that 
only  policy  determining  officers  should  be  elective  nothing 
can  be  said  for  popular  election  of  judges,  certainly  not 
for  the  election  of  the  inferior  judges.  On  the  other 
hand  the  corollary  proposition  that  officers  who  are 
elected  are  necessarily  political  officers,  if  not  politicians 
in  the  odious  sense  of  that  word,  undoubtedly  applies  to 
the  case  of  judges  as  well  as  to  other  officers.  It  is,  of 
course,  true,  that  the  right  to  appeal  from  their  decisions 
tends  to  keep  the  inferior  judges  in  line  with  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  laws  by  the  higher  judges,  but  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  a  great  many  cases  are  for  various  reasons, 
chiefly  perhaps  because  of  the  delay  and  expense  in- 
volved, never  taken  up  to  the  higher  courts,  and  that  the 
handling  of  cases  in  the  inferior  courts  may  work  an 
injustice  under  the  conduct  of  incompetent  or  biased 
judges  that  is  never  righted.  Especially  do  these  consid- 
erations enter  into  the  administration  of  criminal  law 
where  a  discharge  or  acquittal  may  be  brought  about  by 
the  trial  judge  through  ignorance  or  for  improper  con- 
siderations, and  there  is  no  appeal  on  behalf  of  the  public. 
The  office  of  county  judge  is  usually  a  position  that 
does  not  appeal  to  the  best  or  ablest  elements  among 
lawyers,  and  the  control  of  the  office  by  the  county  politi- 
cal ring  has  figured  in  more  than  one  case  of  public 
scandal  where  he  has  used  his  powers  to  prevent  the  pun- 
ishment of  privileged  offenders.  Election  of  these  judges 
is  objectionable,  therefore,  not  only  because  this  method  is 
not  suited  to  picking  men  for  positions  that  should  re- 


142  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

quire  special  training  and  ability  but  because  it  makes  pos- 
sible a  local  anarchy  in  the  administration  of  justice  when 
the  judge  owes  a  direct  and  immediate  responsibility  to 
those  who  put  him  into  office  and  only  an  indirect  and 
incomplete  responsibility  to  the  state  whose  laws  he  is 
charged  to  administer.  This  weakness  in  the  system  of 
local  administration  of  justice  appears,  as  will  be  seen, 
in  connection  with  the  other  county  officers  connected  with 
the  enforcement  and  administration  of  the  law  to  an 
even  more  marked  degree,  but  is  serious  enough  in  the 
case  of  the  judge  to  demand  serious  consideration. 

Similarly  the  union  of  judicial  and  administrative  pow- 
ers in  the  hands  of  the  county  judge,  such  as  occurs  in 
some  of  the  Southern  states  especially,  presents  objec- 
tionable features  in  that  the  qualifications  needed  for 
the  two  kinds  of  functions  are  not  ordinarily  to  be  found 
united  in  the  same  individual. 

In  a  later  chapter  some  attention  will  be  devoted  to 
the  question  of  the  proper  place  of  the  judicial  officers 
now  so  commonly  found  a  part  of  the  county  organiza- 
tion in  the  United  States.  It  may  be  well  to  remark  here, 
however,  that  no  officer  corresponding  to  the  elective 
county  judge  in  the  United  States  is  to  be  found  in  the 
local  government  systems  of  either  England  or  France, 
or  for  that  matter  in  any  European  government. 

The  Clerk  of  Court. —  County  courts  being  generally 
courts  of  record  there  is  a  clerk  provided  for  these  courts, 
and  also  in  those  counties  forming  part  of  a  larger  judi- 
cial district  and  in  which  there  is  no  separate  county  court 
a  clerk  of  court  is  chosen  for  the  county.  In  a  majority 
of  the  states,  therefore,  there  is  a  county  officer  commonly 
called  the  clerk  of  the  court,  and  in  some  cases,  just  as 
there  are  more  than  one  judge  chosen  in  each  county  so 
there  are  more  than  one  clerk  of  court  when  the  county 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     143 

constitutes  the  geographic  jurisdiction  of  more  than  one 
grade  of  court.  In  most  states  the  functions  of  clerk 
of  the  court  and  of  county  clerk  9  have  been  combined 
in  one  and  the  same  person,  some  of  the  states  giving 
the  officer  the  one  title,  others  the  other,  and  a  few  states 
have  separate  officers  for  the  two  functions.  This  union 
of  functions  is  a  survival  of  the  English  system,  perpetu- 
ated in  a  measure  in  some  of  the  American  colonies, 
where  the  clerk  of  the  court  of  quarter  sessions  acted  in 
that  capacity  for  both  the  judicial  and  the  administrative 
functions  of  the  court. 

County  clerks  of  court  are  almost  universally  elected, 
four  o'f  the  New  England  states  providing  for  appoint- 
ment. The  term  of  office  varies  from  two  to  eight  years, 
the  shorter  term  being  the  more  common.  No  personal 
qualifications  are  required  as  a  rule  for  this  office,  except 
the  customary  ones  with  regard  to  residence,  citizenship, 
and  age,  prescribed  for  electors,  and  sufficient  as  a  gen- 
eral rule  for  any  county  office  except  that  of  judge  or 
prosecuting  attorney. 

The  clerks  of  court  perform  the  clerical  and  routine 
administrative  business  of  the  court  such  as  keeping  and 
preserving  the  records  of  proceedings,  guarding  the  prop- 
erty of  the  court,  issuing  writs,  and  in  general  perform- 
ing most  of  the  non- judicial  functions  connected  with  the 
trying  of  cases.  The  other  functions  commonly  per- 
formed by  these  clerks  in  their  capacity  as  clerks  of  the 
county  and  secretary  to  the  county  board  will  be  consid- 
ered under  the  head  of  county  clerks  below. 

As  ministerial  officers  of  the  courts  there  is  even  less 
reason  for  the  election  of  clerks  than  in  the  case  of  the 
county  judges,  for  their  functions  hardly  admit  of  the 
exercise  of  discretion  at  all.  but  on  the  other  hand  re- 

9  See  p.  170. 


i44  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

quire  a  certain  technical  knowledge  which  can  be  secured, 
if  at  all,  only  by  the  process  of  appointment  from  among 
qualified  candidates. 

The  County  Attorney. —  In  more  than  half  of  the 
states  the  constitutions  provide  for  a  county  officer  to  act 
as  public  prosecutor,  and  by  legislation  such  an  office  is 
found  in  about  three-fourths  of  the  states.  This  officer 
is  generally  designated  as  prosecuting  attorney,  county 
attorney,  state's  attorney,  solicitor,  or  district  attorney, 
with  special  names  in  a  few  states.  These  officers  are 
chosen  for  larger  judicial  districts  than  counties  in  about 
a  quarter  of  the  states,  especially  those  in  which  there 
are  no  county  courts  with  criminal  jurisdiction,  but  even 
in  these  states,  as  has  been  seen,  individual  counties  fre- 
quently constitute  judicial  districts  or  circuits  by  them- 
selves and  prosecuting  attorneys  are  then  chosen  for  the 
county. 

The  beginnings  of  this  office  were  noted  in  the  discus- 
sion of  the  historical  development  of  counties  when  Con- 
necticut in  1704  established  the  office  of  local  prosecut- 
ing attorney  to  assist  the  attorney-general  of  the  colony, 
a  precedent  followed  by  one  or  two  other  colonies  and  aft- 
erwards followed  by  the  other  states  in  their  constitu- 
tions and  laws.  This  was  a  departure  from  the  English 
system  of  the  administration  of  criminal  law  and  there 
are  to-day  no  officers  in  the  English  counties  correspond- 
ing to  the  prosecuting  attorney  in  the  United  States. 

These  prosecuting  attorneys  are  popularly  elected  in 
virtually  all  the  states  in  which  they  occur  for  a  term  of 
from  two  to  six  years,  the  two-  and  four-year  terms  being 
the  most  general.  Aside  from  requirements  of  residence 
in  the  county,  citizenship,  and  in  some  states  an  age  re- 
quirement greater  than  twenty-one  years,  a  number  of 
states  require  admission  to  the  bar  or  a  certain  number 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     145 

of  years  of  law  practice  as  qualifications  for  the  office. 
But  for  this  office  as  for  that  of  county  judge  some  states 
are  content  with  such  vague  and  unenforceable  qualifica- 
tions as  that  he  should  be  "  learned  in  the  law,"  while  in 
still  others  no  legal  training  is  prescribed  either  by  con- 
stitution or  by  statute. 

A  certain  number  of  states  provide  that  the  prosecut- 
ing attorneys  shall  be  paid  salaries,  usually  varying  with 
the  population  of  the  county,  but  more  frequently  the  at- 
torney is  paid  either  in  whole  or  in  part  by  fees.  Where, 
as  is  not  infrequently  the  case,  there  is  no  limit  to  the 
sum  collectible  in  fees,  and  the  income  of  the  prosecuting 
attorney  is  dependent  on  the  number  of  convictions  se- 
cured, or  worse  still  on  the  number  of  indictments  secured 
by  him,  the  fees  may  provide  an  immoderate  income.  In 
some  of  the  metropolitan  counties  particularly,  prosecut- 
ing attorneys  have  been  charged  with  becoming  wealthy 
through  their  undue  activities  in  promoting  prosecutions. 
A  few  states  provide  that  the  salary  of  the  prosecuting 
attorney  shall  be  borne  partly  by  the  state  and  partly  by 
the  county. 

As  the  fee  system  of  paying  public  officers  which  is  so 
general  in  the  counties  of  the  United  States,  presents 
some  of  its  worst  phases  in  connection  with  the  prosecu- 
tor's office,  it  may  be  appropriate  to  touch  briefly  here  on 
its  general  relation  to  the  problem  of  good  government, 
for  the  system  though  sufficiently  discredited  by  convinc- 
ing proof  of  its  evils  is  not  without  its  supporters  even 
outside  of  the  circle  of  those  who  profit  by  it  directly  or 
indirectly.  Established  originally  to  meet  primitive  con- 
ditions when  official  acts  were  relatively  few  and  officials 
devoted  only  part  of  their  time  to  public  duties,  it  has 
now  not  only  outlived  the  circumstances  under  which  it 
was  once  almost  necessary,  but  has  become  a  source  of 


146  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

positive  evil.  It  is  sometimes  justified  in  preference  to 
the  salary  system  on  the  ground  that  the  person  directly 
benefited  by  the  service  pays  for  it  instead  of  the  gen- 
eral taxpayer.  Even  if  that  were  a  sound  reason,  it 
would  not  justify  the  practice  of  permitting  the  public 
official  to  retain  the  fees  or  a  portion  of  them  for  his  own 
remuneration  without  definite  limits.  In  fact  in  many 
states  the  system  has  been  modified  to  the  extent  of  pre- 
scribing a  maximum  beyond  which  the  proceeds  of  all 
fees  shall  be  turned  over  to  the  county  treasury.  Where 
that  has  not  been  done,  the  remuneration  received  by 
some  county  officials  in  the  larger  counties  is  out  of  all 
proportion  to  the  salaries  paid  to  other  public  officials  as 
well  as  to  the  services  rendered.  But  a  number  of  the 
public  acts  for  which  fees  are  charged  are  just  as  proper 
charges  on  the  general  county  treasury  as  is  the  cost  of 
public  education,  which  is  assessed  as  well  on  those  who 
have  no  children  to  profit  by  the  schools  as  on  those  who 
have.  From  the  point  of  view  of  the  official,  the  fee  sys- 
tem has  been  defended  on  the  ground  that  it  acts  as  an 
incentive  for  the  diligent  performance  of  his  duties.  But 
the  situation  already  described  with  regard  to  the  prose- 
cuting attorney's  fees  for  indictments  or  convictions 
shows  that  there  is  furnished  an  equally  powerful  incen- 
tive to  undue  official  activity  for  the  purpose  of  swelling 
the  officer's  income.  Much  better  is  the  system  of  as- 
signing to  every  official  enough  duties  to  occupy  his  full 
time,  provide  him  with  an  adequate  salary  and  the  neces- 
sary assistants,  and  then  establish  effective  means  of 
seeing  either  that  his  duties  are  properly  performed  or 
that  someone  else  be  put  in  his  place.  The  opposition 
of  the  politicians,  however,  who  find  in  the  fee  system  a 
source  of  political  patronage  has  prevented  its  abolition 
except  in  a  relatively  few  states  so  far. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     147 

Prosecuting  attorneys  are  usually  removable  on  convic- 
tion for  crime  or  malfeasance  in  office,  in  some  states  by 
the  recall,  in  a  few  instances  by  the  Governor,  indepen- 
dently or  on  address  of  the  legislature,  and  in  a  small 
number  of  states  by  action  of  the  legislature  itself. 

The  duties  of  these  local  attorneys  are  two-fold.  In 
the  first  place,  and  much  the  more  important  of  his  func- 
tions, is  that  of  representing  the  state  in  bringing  indict- 
ments and  prosecuting  defendants, -or  in  the  bringing  by 
or  defending  suits  against  the  state.  In  the  second  place 
they  act  as  the  legal  representatives  and  advisers  of  their 
counties,  bringing  or  defending  suits  in  which  the  county 
is  a  party. 

In  the  first-named  capacity  the  prosecuting  attorney 
is  clearly  an  agent  of  the  state,  and  is  in  fact  one  of  the 
most  important  officers  in  enforcing  the  criminal  laws  of 
the  state.  Prosecutions  for  the  more  serious  crimes 
must  by  the  constitutions  of  most  of  the  states  be  based 
on  presentments  or  indictments  by  the  grand  jury,  but 
in  a  number  of  states  offenders  guilty  of  offenses  cogniz- 
able in  the  county  courts  are  to  be  proceeded  against  either 
by  indictment  or  presentment  or  by  information  of  the 
prosecuting  attorney,  and  in  some  states  only  by  the  latter 
method.  In  any  event  the  prosecuting  attorney  plays 
a  very  important  role.  While  he  cannot  prevent  the  pre- 
sentments or  indictments  by  the  grand  jury,  it  depends 
in  large  part  on  his  diligence  in  collecting  evidence  and 
presenting  cases  whether  the  grand  jury  will  have  any 
basis  on  which  to  return  a  true  bill.  Where  cases  may 
be  brought  on  information  alone  the  prosecuting  attor- 
ney has  an  even  more  decisive  influence  on  what  of- 
fenders will  or  will  not  be  prosecuted.  This  power  in- 
volves the  possibility  of  serious  abuse  either  by  the  un- 
justifiable accusation  of  innocent  persons  or,  what  is  even 


148  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

more  serious  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  public  at 
large,  the  improper  failure  to  institute  proceedings  against 
persons  properly  chargeable  with  crime.  When  it  is 
remembered  that  both  of  these  phases  of  the  prosecut- 
ing attorney's  activities  apply  to  a  large  number  of  local 
officers,  both  as  regards  their  private  and  their  official  acts, 
it  can  readily  be  seen  how  close  is  the  connection  between 
possible  discrimination  or  favoritism  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecuting  attorney  and  the  interests  of  the  dominant 
political  powers  in  the  county.  The  office  is  one  that  is 
peculiarly  rilled  with  temptations,  combined  with  an  al- 
most complete  irresponsibility  except  to  the  political 
powers  that  put  the  incumbent  into  office,  while  at  the 
same  time  the  most  serious  obstacles  stand  in  the  way  of 
the  most  effective  use  of  the  position  for  the  general 
good.10  Small  wonder  then  that  periodically  uncovered 
scandals  show  the  prosecuting  attorney  to  be  the  keystone 
in  the  organized  system  of  corruption  in  public  office  es- 
tablished by  county  political  bosses  or  political  machines 
or  rings. 

At  its  worst,  then,  the  prosecuting  attorney's  office  may 
be  the  cloak  for  covering  corruption  in  public  office.  At 
its  best,  however,  the  position  as  at  present  constituted 
presents  a  serious  aspect.  Even  if  the  prosecuting  at- 
torney represents  truly  the  electorate  of  his  county  by 
whom  he  is  chosen,  he  personifies  the  local  veto  power 
over  state  laws,  to  which  reference  has  already  been  made 
in  the  discussion  of  the  county  judge.  His  duty  is  to 
enforce  the  laws  of  the  state  by  bringing  offenders  to  jus- 
tice, but  his  interest  is  to  act  in  accordance  with  the  sen- 
timent of  the  majority  of  the  county  voters.     When,  as 

10  See  an  article  "  The  Public  Prosecutor :  His  Powers,  Tempta- 
tions, and  Limitations"  by  Howard  S.  Gans,  in  Annals  of  the 
American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  May,  1913,  P- 
120. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     149 

is  not  infrequently  the  case,  particularly  in  the  urban 
counties,  the  majority  local  sentiment  is  opposed  to  the 
enforcement  of  a  particular  state  law,  the  prosecuting 
attorney  who  would  be  reelected  to  his  office  or  who  would 
desire  the  approval  of  his  fellow  citizens  for  greater  po- 
litical honors  or  for  mere  personal  gratification  will  natur- 
ally follow  the  desires  of  his  supporters.  He  is  supposed 
to  be  the  servant  of  the  people  of  the  state  as  a  whole, 
but  actually  he  is  accountable  only  to  the  county  electorate. 
He  cannot  serve  two  masters  whose  commands  conflict 
and  so  he  obeys  the  one  who  put  him  into  power  and  can 
keep  him  there,  thus  introducing  local  anarchy  within 
the  state  and  encouraging  a  dangerous  attitude  of  con- 
tempt for  all  law. 

In  his  capacity  as  prosecuting  attorney,  therefore,  the 
county  attorney  is  not  properly  a  county  office  at  all 
and  should  not  be  locally  elected.  As  a  pivotal  officer  in 
the  enforcement  of  state  laws  he  should  be  an  appointee 
of  the  state  executive  department  and  absolutely  respon- 
sible to  it. 

There  is,  however,  as  we  have  seen  another  aspect  to 
the  office  of  county  attorney.  He  acts  as  the  legal  rep- 
resentative and  advisor  of  his  county.  The  county,  as 
will  be  seen  in  the  succeeding  chapter,  is  now  almost 
everywhere  a  corporation  to  the  extent  at  least  that  it  can 
sue  and  is  liable  to  suits  in  the  courts  in  contract  and  to 
a  less  extent  in  tort.  The  county  attorney  institutes  these 
suits  or  defends  them  on  behalf  of  the  county.  Further- 
more, the  county  board  and  the  various  county  officers  are 
continually  in  need  of  legal  advice  as  to  proposed  action 
and  this  the  county  attorney  is  supposed  to  furnish.  In 
this  capacity  he  is,  of  course,  a  distinctly  local  officer  and 
should  be  locally  chosen.  But  even  regarded  from  this 
angle,  the  county  attorney  should  be  appointed  by  the 


i5o  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

county  board  and  not  chosen,  as  he  almost  universally  is, 
by  popular  election,  on  the  well  recognized  principle  that 
officers  whose  functions  are  administrative  and  not  politi- 
cal, and  for  the  performance  of  whose  duties  special  tech- 
nical qualifications  are  required,  cannot  be  effectively 
selected  by  popular  election. 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  union  of  these  state 
and  local  functions  in  the  county  attorney  present  a  para- 
dox similar  to  that  already  found  to  exist  in  the  office 
of  county  judge  in  many  states,  which  can  be  avoided  only 
by  the  separation  of  these  functions,  and  entrusting  the 
former  to  state  officials  and  the  latter  to  local  officials. 

Owing  to  the  outstanding  and  rather  spectacular  fea- 
tures of  the  prosecutor's  office  in  the  large  urban  coun- 
ties, to  say  nothing  of  the  financial  attractiveness  pre- 
sented, the  position  is  frequently  sought  by  men  of  real 
ability,  though  the  fundamental  importance  of  the  office 
for  purposes  of  political  offense  and  defense  urges  the 
political  party  organization  to  unusual  efforts  to  secure 
its  control.  But  in  the  smaller  counties  where  the  posi- 
tion does  not  loom  large  in  the  public  imagination,  con- 
siderations of  personal  fitness  are  likely  to  become  alto- 
gether secondary  as  compared  with  political  orthodoxy 
from  the  point  of  view  of  the  controlling  political  forces, 
and  the  post  is  very  likely  to  be  awarded  to  inconspicuous 
but  meritorious  party  workers.  With  the  separation  of 
the  activities  of  prosecuting  attorney  from  those  of  legal 
representative  and  advisor  of  the  county  as  a  local  govern- 
ment incorporation,  the  political  importance  of  the  office 
would  be  considerably  diminished  and  the  pressure  for 
control  of  the  office  by  the  county  machine  might  perhaps 
be  sufficiently  lessened  to  make  possible  appointments 
chiefly  on  the  basis  of  merit  and  qualifications  for  the 
office. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     151 

The  county  attorney  in  the  larger  counties  is  some- 
times provided  with  assistant  prosecuting  attorneys, 
whose  salary  and  powers  are  usually  fixed  by  the  legisla- 
ture. Presumably  a  county  should  not  be  required  to 
supply  other  legal  counsel  than  the  official  attorney  and 
such  assistants  as  may  be  found  necessary.  And  yet  in 
a  certain  New  York  county  where  there  was  a  county 
attorney  receiving  $3,000  a  year,  the  county  paid  out  to 
another  attorney  the  sum  of  more  than  $13,000  in  fees 
for  services  which  should  have  been  performed  by  the 
county  attorney.11 

The  Sheriff. —  The  sheriff,  it  will  be  remembered,  is 
the  oldest  county  officer  in  England,  dating  from  Anglo- 
Saxon  times  and  assuming  the  position  of  prime  impor- 
tance in  the  county  under  the  Normans.  Later  on  he 
lost  some  of  his  preeminence  to  the  royal  courts  on  the 
one  hand  and  to  the  justices  of  the  peace  on  the  other, 
but  at  the  time  of  the  founding  of  the  American  colonies 
he  was  still  the  most  important  of  the  county  officers  in 
England  and  was  introduced  in  nearly  all  of  the  colonies 
when  counties  were  established.  To-day  he  is  found  in 
the  counties  of  every  state  in  the  Union,  and  exists  as  a 
constitutional  officer  in  more  than  three-fourths  of  the 
states. 

In  the  colonies  the  sheriff  was  originally  appointed  by 
the  central  authorities,  as  in  England,  but  he  was  one 
of  the  first  of  the  county  officers  to  be  made  elective.  To- 
day all  of  the  constitutions  that  prescribe  the  office  of 
sheriff  make  him  elective  and  in  every  state  except  Rhode 

11  Rockefeller,  "County  Government  from  the  State  Comptroller's 
Standpoint,"  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Third  Meeting  of  the  Con- 
ference for  the  Study  and  Reform  of  County  Government,  1914,  p. 
18,  to  he  found  in  the  collection  of  Documents  on  County  Govern- 
ment issued  by  the  National  Short  Ballot  Organization. 


i52  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Island,  where  the  sheriffs  are  chosen  annually  by  the  legis- 
lature, the  office  is  filled  by  popular  election.  The  most 
usual  term  of  office  is  two  years,  but  in  a  number  of  states 
it  is  four  years  and  in  a  few  three  years.  More  than  a 
third  of  the  state  constitutions  impose  restrictions  on  re- 
election to  the  office,  a  limitation  not  ordinarily  found  in 
connection  with  the  county  offices  so  far  considered. 
These  restrictions  in  general  take  the  form  of  prohibi- 
tions on  reelection  to  succeed  himself  immediately,  but 
do  not  prevent  subsequent  reelection  after  the  lapse  of  a 
term.  The  reason  for  this  limitation  will  appear  from 
the  considerations  of  the  duty  of  the  office,  though  they 
would  seem  to  be  as  applicable  to  the  position  of  prose- 
cuting attorney  just  considered  as  to  that  of  sheriff. 

There  are  as  a  rule  no  qualifications  required  for  the 
office  other  than  the  usual  one  required  of  electors,  but 
in  some  states  a  higher  minimum  age  is  prescribed. 
Most  states,  however,  require  official  bonds,  by  constitu- 
tion or  by  law,  for  the  faithful  discharge  of  the  duties  of 
his  office.  This  is  the  more  important  where,  as  is  done 
in  some  states,  the  county  is  expressly  relieved  of  liabil- 
ity for  the  acts  of  the  sheriff.12  The  sheriff  is  paid 
either  a  definite  salary,  or,  more  commonly  by  fees,  or  by 
a  combination  of  both,  and  in  any  case  the  office  is,  from 
a  financial  point  of  view,  one  of  the  most  desirable  of 
the  county  offices.  Although  general  statistics  as  to  the 
income  received  from  fees  by  sheriffs  are  not  available,  it 
is  known  that  in  the  larger  urban  counties  where  the  fee 
system  prevails  and  the  maximum  is  not  fixed  by  law, 
the  office  is  one  of  the  most  lucrative  in  the  state,  and  with 
the  exception  of  the  President's  office  better  paid  than  are 
any   Federal  positions.     Even  the  salaries   for  sheriffs 

12  See  the  succeeding  chapter  for  a  discussion  of  the  legal  liability 
of  the  county  for  the  acts  of  its  officers. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     153 

fixed  by  law  are  higher  as  a  rule  than  those  paid  to  other 
county  officers.13 

The  sheriff  is  removable  by  the  governor  in  New  York, 
Michigan,  and  Wisconsin,  is  impeachable  by  the  legisla- 
ture in  a  few  states,  is  subject  to  recall  in  a  few  others, 
and  is  generally  removable  after  trial  and  conviction  for 
malfeasance  in  office. 

Although  the  sheriff's  position  has  diminished  greatly 
in  importance  as  compared  with  his  original  powers,  he 
is  probably  the  most  outstanding  as  well  as  the  most  uni- 
versal of  county  officers.  His  powers,  generally  speak- 
ing, fall  into  two  classes.  On  the  one  hand  he  is  the  local 
representative  of  the  police  functions  of  the  executive 
arm  of  the  state  government  for  the  preservation  of  public 
safety;  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  the  executive  officer  of 
the  courts,  charged  with  executing  their  judgments  and 
decrees.  In  addition  to  these  two  principal  forms  of 
executive  activity,  the  sheriff  performs  a  variety  of  ad- 
ministrative functions  varying  in  different  states,  but 
not  constituting  anywhere  his  most  important  activities. 

As  the  representative  of  the  state  authority  for  the 
preservation  of  law  and  order  he  must  actively  prevent, 
if  possible,  the  commission  of  crime,  and  in  case  an  offense 
has  been  committed  he  must  apprehend  the  offender  and 
keep  him  in  custody.  In  times  of  public  disturbance, 
such  as  strikes,  riots,  and  attempted  lynchings  the  position 
of  the  sheriff  becomes  one  of  great  importance,  and  per- 
sonal qualifications  of  bravery,  cool  headedness,  and  tact 
are  demanded.  The  sheriff  may  appoint  special  deputies 
to  assist  him,  may  summon  the  manpower  of  the  county, 
known  as  the  posse  comitatus,  or  even  call  on  the  gover- 
nor for  aid  with  state  troops.     But  in  ordinary  times  the 

13  The  sheriff  of  New  York  county  receives  a  salary  of  $12,000, 
and  in  addition  about  $60,000  in  fees.    Gilbertson,  The  County,  p.  51. 


154  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

power  of  the  sheriff  to  prevent  crime  is  very  limited,  for 
he  does  not  command  an  organized  force  similar  to  that 
maintained  in  the  cities  for  purposes  of  patrol.  The 
cities,  towns,  and  other  subdivisions  of  the  county  have 
as  a  rule  their  own  local  police  officers  whose  duty  is 
analogous  to  that  of  the  sheriff  in  this  regard,  but  they 
are  not  under  his  control  and  so  far  from  assisting  him 
may  in  fact  come  into  conflict  with  him  or  his  deputies 
when  the  latter  attempt  to  act  within  the  territorial  jur- 
isdiction of  the  former,  although  the  power  of  the  sher- 
iff extends  nominally  over  the  whole  of  the  county. 
In  the  strictly  rural  portions  of  the  county,  where  there 
are  no  local  constables  or  police,  the  sheriff  should  exer- 
cise his  important  function  of  protecting  persons  and 
property  through  the  prevention  of  crime,  but  in  order 
to  do  that  effectively  he  should  have  at  his  disposal  an 
organized  force  of  rural  police  for  patrolling  the  rural 
highways.  Such  a  force  might  be  a  state  force,  such 
as  is  found  in  one  or  two  states,  and  in  France,  com- 
manded locally  by  the  sheriff  as  a  state  officer,  or  a  county 
police  force  such  as  is  maintained  in  the  English  counties. 
Where  the  county  is  given  a  local  police  ordinance  power 
as  has  been  seen  to  be  the  case  in  certain  states,  there 
would  seem  to  be  the  same  reason  for  a  local  police  force 
as  in  the  case  of  cities  with  their  local  ordinances  to  en- 
force. At  present  it  may  be  said  that  in  the  rural  por- 
tions of  our  counties  there  is  virtually  no  police  protec- 
tion in  the  vast  majority  of  the  states. 

In  the  performance  of  his  duties  to  arrest  offenders 
against  state  laws  it  can  readily  be  seen  that  the  sheriff 
occupies  a  position  analogous  to  that  of  the  prosecuting 
attorney.  With  the  exception  of  the  more  serious  crimes 
and  when  the  offenders  are  known,  the  prosecuting  at- 
torney and  the  grand  jury  will  necessarily  have  to  rely  to 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     155 

a  considerable  extent  on  the  ability  and  diligence  of  the 
sheriff  in  arresting  violators  of  the  law  before  there  is 
any  possibility  of  proceeding  against  them.  Even  where 
the  offenders  are  known  and  indicted,  the  sheriff  must 
secure  their  persons  before  criminal  proceedings  can  be 
continued.  It  is  possible,  therefore,  for  the  sheriff,  as  it 
has  been  seen  to  be  possible  for  the  prosecuting  attorney, 
to  be  guided  in  the  performance  of  his  duties  as  an  agent 
of  the  executive  arm  of  the  state  by  local  pressure  and 
influence.  It  is  true  that  there  is  less  room  for  the  exer- 
cise of  discretion  in  the  case  of  the  sheriff  than  in  the 
case  of  the  prosecuting  attorney,  and  that  neglect  in  the 
performance  of  his  duties  can  be  more  easily  shown,  but 
considerable  opportunity  exists  here  also  for  the  nullifica- 
tion of  the  state  law  by  officers  elected  by  the  county. 

As  the  sheriff  properly  performs  no  local  political  func- 
tions he  should  not  be  elected,  and  as  his  duties  as  con- 
servator of  the  peace  are  almost  everywhere  entirely  in 
the  execution  of  state  laws,  he  should  theoretically  be 
centrally  appointed,  controlled,  and  removed.  In  France 
and  in  continental  Europe  generally,  the  corresponding 
police  officers  in  the  units  of  local  government  occupy 
that  position.  In  England,  however,  there  has  been  the 
strongest  opposition  to  central  control  of  police,  in  spite 
of  the  obviously  state-wide  aspect  of  this  function,  and 
in  the  English  counties,  as  has  been  seen,  the  police  force 
is  a  county  force  locally  selected,  disciplined,  and  removed, 
with  the  Home  Office  exercising  a  power  of  inspection 
by  virtue  only  of  its  power  to  withhold  the  national  sub- 
vention, which  covers  about  half  the  cost  of  maintaining 
the  local  police.  In  this  country  too,  as  will  be  seen, 
various  attempts  at  state"  control  of  police  in  cities  have 
aroused  the  intensest  local  antagonism,  resulting  in  the 
abandonment  of  the  attempt  in  various  states  where  it 


i56  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

has  been  tried.  Perhaps  there  would  not  be  the  same 
local  opposition  to  state  police  for  the  counties,  as  com- 
munity consciousness  is  much  less  developed  in  counties 
than  in  cities,  and  so  a  real  state  police  system  for  coun- 
ties might  be  practically  as  well  as  theoretically  the  best. 
On  the  other  hand,  antagonism  toward  the  enforcement 
of  state  laws  is  not  as  pronounced  in  the  rural  counties 
as  in  the  cities,  and  a  county  police  force  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  sheriff,  himself  subject  to  state  supervision, 
might  prove  satisfactory.14 

The  duties  of  the  sheriff  as  a  police  officer  are,  as  has 
been  said,  only  a  part  of  his  functions.  He  is  also  the 
officer  for  carrying  out  the  findings  of  the  courts.  It  is 
commonly  the  duty  of  the  sheriff  to  "  attend  all  courts 
of  record,  either  personally  or  by  deputy.  He  also  exe- 
cutes such  processes  as  under  the  practice  of  the  court 
may  be  directed  to  him.  Witnesses  and  jurors  are  thus 
summoned  by  him  to  appear  before  the  court ;  arrests  and 
attachments  of  property  are  made;  and  executions  are 
levied  to  enforce  final  judgments."  15  The  sheriff  is 
also  responsible  for  the  county  jail  and  its  inmates,  and 
is  commonly  charged  with  the  execution  of  prisoners  con- 
demned to  death.  In  all  these  capacities-  the  sheriff  acts 
as  a  state  agent,  not  as  a  local  officer,  and  his  responsibility 
should  be  to  the  state,  not  to  the  county,  although  in  that 
case  the  county  should  not  be  held  responsible  for  neglect 
of  his  duties,  as  it  sometimes  is  by  statute. 

14  See  a  pamphlet  entitled  "  Why  New  York  Needs  a  State  Po- 
lice" published  by  the  Committee  for  a  State  Police,  and  contained 
in  the  collection  of  Documents  on  County  Government,  issued  by 
the  National  Short  Ballot  Organization.  Also  an  address  by  Ernest 
Cawcroft,  "  The  Sheriff  and  a  State  Constabulary,"  in  the  Proceed- 
ings of  the  First  Conference  for  Better  County  Government  in  New 
York  State,  to  be  found  in  the  same  collection  of  documents. 

15  Baldwin,  The  American  Judiciary,  p.  136. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     157 

In  addition  to  these  state  functions,  the  sheriff  is 
charged  in  a  number  of  states  with  local  functions  in  the 
county.  The  most  general  of  these  is  the  duty  of  acting 
as  county  tax  collector,  particularly  in  several  of  the 
Southern  states.  As  the  proper  performance  of  the 
sheriff's  state  functions  would  fully  occupy  the  time  of 
the  sheriff  in  all  but  the  smallest  and  least  populous  of 
counties,  there  is  no  need  of  adding  any  local  administra- 
tive duties  to  the  sheriff's  functions  and  thus  combining 
a  local  phase  with  his  state  activities. 

The  sheriff  may  usually  appoint  his  own  deputies,  to'  a 
number  fixed  by  law  or  by  rule  of  the  courts,  and  at  a 
salary  determined  by  law  or  by  action  of  the  county  au- 
thority. Special  deputies  may  be  authorized  in  time  of 
public  disturbance.  The  deputies  are  the  agents  of  the 
sheriff,  who  usually  is  liable  for  their  acts  and  may  re- 
quire a  bond  for  his  protection.  In  some  states  the  prohi- 
bition against  reelection  to  the  office  of  sheriff  is  extended 
to  prevent  a  deputy  sheriff  from  becoming  sheriff  for 
the  succeeding  term  or  vice  versa.  These  provisions  are 
intended  partly  to  insure  against  the  perpetuation  of 
abuses  in  the  powerful  and  largely  uncontrolled  office  of 
sheriff,  and  partly  are  a  mere  constitutional  or  statutory 
recognition  of  the  popular  doctrine  of  rotation  in  office. 
They  would  not  appear,  however,  to  warrant  special  em- 
phasis in  the  case  of  the  sheriff's  office. 

The  Coroner. —  Another  ancient  English  officer  of  the 
county,  introduced  into  the  county  system  of  the  Ameri- 
can colonies  and  perpetuated  in  most  of  the  states  of  the 
Union,  is  the  coroner.  In  the  early  beginnings  of  the 
office  in  England,  the  position  was  one  of  considerable 
importance,  for  the  coroner  acted  as  a  sort  of  general 
assistant  to  the  sheriff  in  addition  to  duties  especially  as- 
signed to  him  as  "  crowner,"  or  personal  representative 


158  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  crown,  to  look  after  the  local  interests  of  the  lat- 
ter. But  in  England  the  office  had  declined  greatly  in 
importance  by  the  time  it  was  introduced  into  the  Ameri- 
can colonies,  and  in  the  American  states  to-day  the  office 
is  relatively  limited  in  power.  Nevertheless  it  exists  as 
a  constitutional  office  in  nearly  half  of  the  states  and  by 
statute  in  most  of  the  others. 

Like  most  of  the  other  county  officers,  the  coroner  is 
elected  by  popular  vote  in  the  great  majority  of  states. 
But  in  a  few  states  he  is  appointed  by  the  governor,  and 
in  a  few  others  by  the  courts.  With  a  few  exceptions  no 
special  qualifications  are  required  for  the  position  though, 
as  will  be  seen,  the  duties  of  the  office  are  such  as  to  de- 
mand special  qualifications  for  their  proper  performance. 
The  term  of  office  is  ordinarily  the  same  as  for  other 
county  officers,  varying  from  two  to  four  years.  The 
office  is  paid  by  salary  or  fees  or  a  combination  of  both, 
the  payment  by  fees  received  from  the  county  treasury 
being  the  prevailing  method.  It  is  not  uncommon  to  find 
more  than  one  coroner  in  the  larger  counties,  the  number 
varying  with  the  population  of  the  county.  In  the  larger 
urban  counties  the  office  involves  a  very  considerable 
public  expense.  The  coroner  is  removable  in  the  same 
way  as  are  most  of  the  county  officers,  on  conviction  for 
crime,  or  malfeasance  in  office.  In  a  few  states  he  is 
subject  to  recall  the  same  as  other  county  officers  and, 
more  rarely,  in  Wisconsin,  for  instance,  by  action  of  the 
Governor. 

The  main  duties  of  the  coroner  relate  to  activities  in 
cases  of  death  supposed  to  be  due  to  violence.16  He  must 
hold  an  inquest  in  such  cases  to  determine  whether  or 

18  See  an  article  by  Oscar  Schultz,  "  The  Coroner's  Office,"  in 
the  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Sci- 
ence (May,  IQI3),  P-  I*2- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     159 

not  deaths  has  been  due  to  violence,  meaning  particularly 
unlawful  means,  and  if  so  to  fix  if  possible  responsibility 
for  the  death  and  to  aid  in  the  apprehension  of  the  per- 
son or  persons  suspected  of  criminal  responsibility  in 
connection  therewith.  For  this  purpose  he  impanels  the 
coroner's  jury,  usually  consisting  of  six  persons,  who 
view  the  body,  hear  witnesses,  and  receive  instructions 
on  the  law  from  the  coroner.  The  coroner  in  this  capac- 
ity performs  two  different  kinds  of  acts.  He  judges  of 
the  cause  of  the  death  from  a  medical  standpoint  and  the 
method  by  which  that  cause  was  put  into  operation  from 
a  legal  point  of  view.  The  basis  for  sound  conclusions 
as  to  the  first  of  these  inquiries  must  rest  in  a  special  de- 
gree of  medical  knowledge.  The  proper  conclusions  and 
method  of  procedure  in  reaching  them  as  regards  the 
second  aspect  of  his  functions  require  a  special  knowledge 
of  criminal  law  and  the  factors  that  are  important  in  the 
detection  and  proof  of  crime.  The  coroner  as  a  rule  has 
no  qualifications  for  his  office  from  either  point  of  view 
and  it  is  safe  to  say  that  a  coroner  who  possesses  ability 
in  both  these  directions  is  still  to  be  found.  And  yet 
nothing  short  of  this  union  will  enable  a  coroner  properly 
to  perform  the  duties  imposed  upon  him  by  law.  As  a 
result,  the  functions  of  the  coroner's  office  are,  generally 
speaking,  a  farce.  But  if  his  activities  were  merely  use- 
less, the  situation  would  not  be  as  bad  as  it  is,  for  he  is 
in  many  cases  -a  positive  hindrance  to  the  accomplishment 
of  the  very  purposes  for  which  his  office  is  supposed  to 
exist.  Through  ignorance  or  clumsiness  he  may  destroy 
evidence  of  crime  which  is  essential  to  conviction  and 
the  prosecutor's  work  is  frequently  hopelessly  prejudiced 
by  the  amateurish  meddling  of  the  coroner.17 

17  See  an  article  by  Joseph  Du  Vivier,  "  The  Abolishment  of  the 
Coroner's  Office,"  Proceedings  of  the  Conference  for  the  Study  and 


i6o  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

It  is  obvious  that  there  is  no  justification  for  the  popu- 
lar election  of  such  an  officer  as  the  coroner,  for  he  is  in 
no  sense  a  policy  determining  officer,  and  his  duties  re- 
quire very  special  technical  qualifications.  The  office  is 
of  real  importance  only  to  the  county  political  machine 
and  the  logical  cure  for  this  excrescence  on  the  county  or- 
ganization is  complete  removal.  The  medical  aspects  of 
the  coroner's  functions  can  better  be  entrusted  to  medical 
examiners  who  will  act  under  the  direction  of  and  in 
harmony  instead  of  at  cross  purposes  with  the  prosecu- 
tor's office.  This  method  is  followed  in  Massachusetts, 
New  Jersey,  and  New  Hampshire,  and,  since  191 8,  in  the 
counties  within  New  York  City.18 

In  addition  to  the  main  duties  of  the  coroner  noted 
above  he  is  charged  in  a  number  of  states  with  other 
duties,  frequently  wholly  unrelated  to  his  main  func- 
tion. In  many  cases  he  is  constituted  a  sort  of  vice- 
sheriff  and  may  succeed  to  the  office  if  vacated  during  a 
term.  But  in  no  case  are  the  other  duties  of  the  coroner 
of  sufficient  importance  to  require  the  retention  of  an 
office  which  has  been  the  subject  of  general  ridicule  in 
England  for  centuries  and  of  concerted  attack  by  thought- 
ful public  opinion  in  this  country  for  more  than  half 
a  hundred  years.19 

Justices  of  the  Peace. —  The  justice  of  the  peace  in 
England  was  and  still  is  a  county  officer,  that  is,  he  is 
appointed  in  almost  all  cases  for  the  county  as  a  whole. 
The  same  arrangement  was  generally  followed  in  the 
American  colonies  and  in  the  early  states.  With  the  in- 
troduction of  the  elective  principle  for  justices  of  the 

Reform  of  County  Government,  January,  1914,  published  by  the 
New  York  Short  Ballot  Organization.  To  be  found  in  the  collec- 
tion of  Documents  on  County  Government,  op.  cit. 

18  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  p.  134. 

19  Fairlie,  Local  Government,  etc.,  p.  115. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     161 

peace  and  the  general  establishment  of  subordinate  dis- 
tricts within  the  county,  the  justices  of  the  peace  have 
come  to  be  chosen  for  the  smaller  districts,  though  with 
a  jurisdiction  extending  over  the  whole  county.  Hence 
they  are  still  generally  regarded  as  county  officers,  and  in 
a  few  states,  as  has  been  seen,  the  locally  elected  justices 
still  act  in  a  body  as  the  county  board  and  so  are  truly 
county  officers.  But  in  view  of  their  local  election  and 
usual  exercise  of  powers  over  a  limited  jurisdiction,  they 
can  more  conveniently  be  considered  in  connection  with 
the  discussion  of  the  organization  of  these  subdivisions. 

County  Finance  Officers 

The  County  Assessor. —  A  county  officer  that  is 
found  in  virtually  all  of  the  states  having  the  so-called 
county-district  scheme  of  government,  as  distinguished 
from  the  county-township  system,  is  the  officer  who 
makes  the  assessments  of  property  for  purposes  of  taxa- 
tion, commonly  called  the  county  assessor.  In  early 
colonial  times  this  function  was  generally  exercised  by 
the  justices  of  the  peace  and  was  one  of  their  most  im- 
portant functions.  But  before  the  end  of  the  colonial 
period  the  power  of  assessing  taxes  was  transferred  in 
most  cases  to  the  county  boards  of  commissioners  or 
supervisors,  the  original  assessment  or  the  supervision 
of  assessments  by  townships  being,  indeed,  one  of  the 
principal  reasons  for  the  original  establishment  of  these 
authorities.  Gradually,  however,  special  county  assessors 
were  created  in  most  of  the  states  having  the  distinctively 
strong  county  system. 

County  assessors,  in  a  few  cases  under  different  names, 
are  popularly  elected  in  virtually  every  state  in  which  they 
are  found,  the  term  of  office  being  generally  two  years, 
though  in  the  Southern  states  four-year  terms  are  not 


162  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

uncommon.  In  at  least  ten  states  the  office  is  elective  by 
constitutional  provision.  No  special  qualifications  are 
required,  in  general,  for  the  office,  though  its  duties  re- 
quire for  their  proper  performance  special  knowledge. 
Assessors  are  paid  either  by  fees  or  by  salary,  the  former 
system  being  the  most  common,  the  assessor  usually  re- 
ceiving a  certain  percentage  of  the  property  value  assessed. 
Assessors  may  usually  appoint  assistants  under  proper 
authorization  at  a  compensation  fixed  by  them  or  by  the 
county  board. 

The  duties  of  the  assessors  in  general  are  to  list  all 
property  and  persons  subject  to  taxation.  Appeals  are 
usually  allowed  to  the  county  board,  acting  as  a  board  of 
equalization,  and  the  action  of  the  assessors  is  subject  to 
constitutional  and  legal  limitations,  enforceable  in  the 
courts.  But  in  spite  of  this  control,  the  office  is  one  in 
which  favoritism  and  discrimination  easily  creep  in  and 
are  not  readily  corrected.  The  fair  and  equal  valuation 
of  property  is  at  best  a  difficult  undertaking,  requiring  an 
understanding  of  the  elements  that  enter  into  the  market 
value  of  real  estate  which  can  be  acquired  only  by  con- 
siderable experience.  Furthermore,  as  the  statements  of 
the  property  owners  are  ordinarily  accepted  as  the  basis 
of  the  valuations,  and  the  raising  of  assessments  by  the 
elective  assessor  is  likely  to  cost  him  a  political  supporter, 
the  evils  of  popular  election  for  short  terms  as  a  method 
of  filling  this  office  are  apparent. 

But  even  if  the  assessor  were  appointed  by  the  county 
board,  as  he  undoubtedly  should  be,  there  is  another  prob- 
lem in  connection  with  the  county  assessor  similar  to  the 
one  that  we  have  seen  to  arise  in  connection  with  the  judi- 
cial officers  of  the  county.  For  purposes  of  county  reve- 
nue the  valuations  of  the  assessor  are  a  matter  of  local 
concern,  and  the  county  might  be  left  to  its  own  devices 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     163 

so  far  as  the  state  is  concerned,  even  though  its  action 
may  run  counter  to  express  constitutional  and  legislative 
instructions  and  commands.  But  the  same  officer  acts 
as  a  direct  agent  of  the  state  in  that  state  taxes  are  levied 
on  the  basis  of  the  valuations  made  by  these  same  county 
assessors.  Here  we  have  a  repetition  of  the  familiar 
comedy  of  county  government  in  which  an  officer  re- 
sponsible to  the  county  electorate  is  charged  with  the 
performance  of  a  duty  for  the  state  the  proper  execution 
of  which  is  sure  to  run  counter  to  the  wishes  of  his  bosses. 
The  state  collects  its  general  property  taxes  from  the 
counties  on  the  basis  of  the  assessed  valuation.  The 
lower  the  assessments,  therefore,  the  less  will  any  par- 
ticular county  have  to  contribute  to  the  state  treasury, 
and  an  ignoble  strife  is  engendered  among  county  as- 
sessors —  and  this  is  true  in  general  of  the  local  assess- 
ing authority,  whatever  its  name  or  composition  —  to 
see  who  can  be  most  successful  in  relieving  the  county 
of  its  fair  share  of  state  taxes.  Meanwhile  the  state  ad- 
ministration, almost  universally,  stands  by,  capable  of 
seeing  but  incapable  of  correcting  these  abuses. 

The  solution  of  this  difficulty  is  not  so  simple,  how- 
ever, as  it  would  appear  to  be  in  the  case  of  the  judicial 
officers  of  the  state  who  appear  as  county  officers.  The 
proper  field  of  action  of  the  latter  is  with  reference  to 
the  state  alone  and  they  are  not  properly  entrusted  with 
local  functions.  The  assessment  of  taxes,  however,  is 
a  function  that  must  be  performed  for  every  governmental 
area  that  has  the  power  to  levy  a  general  property  tax, 
namely  the  state,  the  county,  and  the  taxing  units  within 
the  county.  Since  the  market  value  of  property,  how- 
ever, when  properly  determined  by  any  authority  is  a 
fixed  quantity,  no  matter  for  what  sort  of  taxes  it  is 
being  assessed,  there  is  obviously  no  reason  for  having 


164  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

more  than  one  assessing  authority.  But  shall  that  au- 
thority be  a  local  authority  or  a  state  authority?  The 
results  of  entrusting  the  function  to  locally  elected  assess- 
ors independent  of  the  state  administration  have  proven 
too  generally  ludicrous  to  leave  the  advocates  of  the  exist- 
ing system  much  ground  to  stand  upon.  Ohio  in  191 3 
took  a  step  toward  tryuig  the  opposite  plan,  namely  the 
making  of  the  assessor's  office  a  state  office  to  be  filled  by 
appointment  of  the  Governor  and  to  be  free  from  local 
politics.  It  never  had  a  chance  to  prove  its  merits  or 
defects,  for  it  was  unpopular  in  its  very  conception  and 
the  law  was  repealed  by  the  succeeding  administration.20 
It  seems  safe  to  conclude  that  this  experience  of  an  other- 
wise progressive  state  shows  a  fundamental  aversion  to 
the  plan  of  making  the  tax  assessors  purely  state  officers. 
There  remains,  therefore,  the  possibility  of  keeping  the 
assessors  local  officers,  but  appointed  instead  of  elected, 
for  the  reasons  given  above,  subject,  however,  to  state 
supervision  and  control.  A  number  of  states,  as  will  be 
seen  later,  have  state  boards  for  the  purpose  of  equalizing 
assessments  in  the  various  subdivisions  of  the  state.  But 
these  boards  for  various  reasons  have  been  singularly  in- 
effective and  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  improved  the 
existing  situation  perceptibly.  But  within  recent  years, 
particularly  since  1900,  state  tax  commissions  have  been 
established  in  more  than  half  of  the  states  with  powers 
of  supervision  over  local  assessments,  with  some  marked 
results.  Probably  these  powers  can  be  made  sufficiently 
effective  to  protect  the  vital  interests  of  the  state  without 
doing  the  violence  to  the  feeling  of  local  autonomy  that 
is  involved  in  the  central  appointment  or  removal  of  offi- 
cers who  perform  functions  that  are  in  part  of  a  local 
character.     It  may  be  well  to  recall  that  in  England  the 

20 Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  p.  in. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     165 

assessment  of  local  taxes  is  in  the  hands  of  officers  of 
the  poor-law  parishes  whose  valuation,  though  not  bind- 
ing on  the  county  districts,  boroughs,  and  parishes  are 
ordinarily  accepted  by  them  as  the  basis  of  their  rates. 

In  those  states  in  which  there  are  no  special  county 
assessors  the  assessment  of  property  for  taxation  is  either 
entrusted  to  some  other  county  officer,  or,  more  com- 
monly, it  is  a  function  of  the  township  or  town,  usually 
with  some  measure  of  supervision  by  county  authorities. 
This  is  the  system  in  all  of  the  New  England  states,  in 
New  York,  and  in  most  of  the  states  that  have  followed 
the  New  York  plan.  In  five  or  six  states  both  systems 
are  found  within  the  same  state. 

Finally,  in  some  states  the  tax  assessor  performs  some 
other  duties  in  addition  to  those  connected  with  the  as- 
sessment of  property,  though  it  is  rare  that  he  is  charged 
with  other  local  duties  of  any  importance. 

Tax  Collectors  and  Treasurers. —  In  half  a  dozen 
states  the  collection  of  taxes  is  entrusted  to  a  special  of- 
ficer called  the  tax  collector,  popularly  elected  like  the 
other  county  officers.  In  a  few  states  the  sheriff  retains 
this  portion  of  his  ancient  functions  in  addition  to  his 
judicial  duties,  and  in  some  others  other  county  officials 
act  in  the  capacity  of  collectors.  But  in  the  great  major- 
ity of  states  the  taxes  are  collected  by  the  county  treasur- 
ers. 

In  the  colonies  the  collection  of  taxes  was  in  some  in- 
stances entrusted  to  the  sheriff,  as  in  England,  but  as  early 
as  1654  Massachusetts  created  the  elective  office  of  county 
treasurer  to  attend  to  this  and  other  aspects  of  the  admin- 
istration of  county  funds.  To-day  the  office  of  county 
treasurer  is  a  constitutional  one  in  over  a  third  of  the 
states  and  is  found  by  statute  in  virtually  all  of  the  other 
states.     In  all  but  a  few  of  the  states  these  officers  are 


1 66  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

popularly  elected,  the  method  of  selection  in  the  others 
being  generally  by  the  county  board.  The  term  of  office 
is  commonly  two  years,  though  four-year  terms  are  also 
found.  In  a  number  of  states  there  is  a  limitation  against 
immediate  reelection,  similar  to  that  found  in  connection 
with  the  office  of  sheriff.  The  law  usually  requires  the 
putting  of  the  county  treasurers  under  heavy  official  bonds 
for  the  proper  handling  of  the  public  funds  that  come 
into  their  possession. 

Treasurers  are  paid  by  fees  or  by  salary,  the  latter  be- 
coming more  common,  though  in  some  states  both  sources 
of  income  are  permitted.  But  perhaps  the  most  remuner- 
ative phase  of  the  county  treasurer's  activity  comes  from 
his  freedom  of  choice  in  selecting  the  bank  in  which  the 
county  funds  shall  be  deposited.  This  is  sometimes  re- 
ceived directly  in  the  shape  of  interest  on  the  deposits, 
as  in  many  cases  the  law  does  not  provide  that  such  in- 
terest shall  accrue  to  the  benefit  of  the  public  treasury. 
But  even  where  that  is  provided,  the  treasurer  frequently 
becomes  the  recipient  of  gratuities  from  the  banks  he 
selects  as  the  depository.  Figures  are  not  generally  avail- 
able as  to  sums  so  received,  but  an  idea  of  the  financial 
returns  to  the  incumbent  in  the  larger  counties  may  be 
gathered  from  the  fact  that  in  Cook  County,  Illinois,  the 
net  income  of  the  office  in  recent  years  is  estimated  to 
have  amounted  in  a  four-year  term  to  something  between 
$200,000  and  $500,000  ;21  and  in  1906  Hamilton  County, 
Ohio,  recovered  $200,000  from  former  county  treasur- 
ers for  gratuities  received  by  them  from  the  banks  which 
they  selected  as  depositories.22  Investigations  in  other 
counties  have  shown  the  net  income  of  the  treasurer's 
office,  legitimate  and  illegitimate,  to  be  so  large  as  to 

21  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  p.  51. 

22  Fairlie,  op.  cit.,  p.  124  note. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     167 

make  the  office  most  desirable  from  a  financial  point  of 
view. 

The  duties  of  the  county  treasurers  are  in  the  first 
place  to  receive  the  state  and  county  taxes,  and  in  some 
cases  those  of  the  subdivisions  of  the  county,  either  di- 
rectly from  taxpayers  or  from  special  collectors  where 
those  are  provided.  The  state  funds  are  then  turned  over 
to  the  state  treasury,  the  funds  of  the  subordinate  units 
to  their  treasurers,  and  the  county  funds  deposited  in 
banks.  In  addition  to  the  taxes  the  treasurer  commonly 
receives  other  county  funds,  such  as  fines,  fees,  and  in- 
come from  property. 

The  treasurer  is  made  responsible  for  the  proper  dis- 
bursement of  county  funds  and  he  is  not  permitted  to  pay 
out  moneys  except  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
the  law.  But  owing  to  the  general  lack  of  proper  ac- 
counting methods  for  the  counties  and  inadequate  super- 
vision by  other  local  or  state  authorities,  the  greatest 
laxness  exists  in  regard  to  the  handling  of  the  public 
funds  by  the  county  treasurers.  In  recent  years  there 
have  been  a  number  of  investigations  into  this  phase  of 
county  administration  either  by  unofficial  bodies  or  by 
state  officials  in  those  states  where  state  supervision  of 
accounts  has  been  introduced,  and  the  cases  in  which  il- 
legal disbursement  of  county  funds  has  been  discovered 
are  so  numerous  as  to  justify  the  conclusion  that  as  a 
general  rule  either  through  out  and  out  corruption  or 
through  inefficiency  and  carelessness,  county  funds  are 
depleted  to  a  large  extent  by  illegal  payments.23 

23  For  specific  instances  of  these  illegal  and  illegitimate  practices  i 
in  connection  with  the  office  of  county  treasurer  reference  may  be 
made  to  the  investigations  in  Cook  County,  Illinois,  and  Nassau  and 
Orange  Counties,  New  York,  comprised  in  the  collection  of  Docu- 
ments on  County  Government,  piepared  by  the  National  Short  Bal- 
lot Organization. 


1 68  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

An  inevitable  consequence  of  the  financial  attractive- 
ness of  this  office  and  its  almost  complete  freedom,  until 
within  recent  years,  from  control  or  even  investigation, 
has  been  to  make  it  especially  desirable  from  the  point  of 
view  of  the  county  political  machine.  The  position  re- 
quires not  merely  personal  integrity,  though  that  is  a 
prime  requisite  in  view  of  the  opportunities  for  finan- 
cially profitable  irregularities,  but  also  ability  in  the  keep- 
ing of  accurate  accounts  and  the  efficient  administration 
of  finances  generally.  From  what  has  gone  before  it  is 
clear  that  the  position  of  county  treasurer  is  not  one 
that  should  be  filled  by  popular  election,  since  the  duties 
of  the  office  are  in  no  proper  sense  political.  So  far  as 
the  treasurer  handles  the  public  funds  of  the  state  or  of  the 
subordinate  divisions  of  the  county,  he  should  be  sub- 
ject, of  course,  to  supervision  by  authorities  distinct  from 
the  county  government.  But  as  his  main  responsibility 
is  in  connection  with  county  funds,  he  should  be  appointed 
by  the  county  board  and  subject  to  continuous  and  inde- 
pendent audit  in  order  to  insure  effective  control  of  his 
custody  of  the  county  funds.  Even  as  a  purely  local 
officer  he  can  properly  be  required  by  the  state  to  keep 
his  accounts  in  a  prescribed  manner  and  to  make  regular 
reports  of  his  activities. 

The  County  Auditor. —  An  officer  of  more  recent  or- 
igin and  one  much  less  generally  found  than  the  treas- 
urer in  the  states  of  the  Union  is  the  county  auditor.  In 
only  a  few  states  does  the  constitution  require  such  an 
officer  but  in  more  than  a  dozen  other  states  the  office 
is  found  by  statute,  either  by  general  law  for  all  counties 
or  counties  of  a  given  size,  or  for  particular  counties  only. 
In  some  of  the  states  the  auditor  is  appointed  either  cen- 
trally or  by  the  county  board,  but  generally  this  office  like 
the  rest  is  popularly  elected.     In  some  cases,  as  in  Michi- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     169 

gan  and  Pennsylvania,  there  is  a  board  of  county  auditors, 
and  in  some  other  states  other  county  officers,  such  as  the 
county  clerks  or  recorders,  act  as  county  auditors.  The 
term  of  office  is  usually  either  two  or  four  years.  The 
auditor  is  paid  by  fees  or  salary  and  in  some  of  the 
larger  counties  the  compensation  here  also  is  excessive.24 

The  duties  of  the  auditor  are  to  keep  the  accounts  of 
the  county  and  to  issue  warrants  against  the  county  treas- 
ury for  payments  authorized  by  law  or  by  the  county 
board.  But  the  auditor  is  not  usually  a  comptroller, 
that  is,  he  ordinarily  can  discover  irregularities  in  ac- 
counts after  they  have  occurred,  but  does  not  scrutinize 
the  legality  of  the  daily  finance  transactions  of  the  other 
county  officers.  In  order  to  perform  his  function  prop- 
erly he  should  have  special  technical  qualifications  and 
be  free  from  political  influence.  If  he  is  to  act  as  a 
check  on  the  expenditures  authorized  by  the  county  board, 
he  should  be  independent  of  that  body,  and  the  best 
method  of  providing  for  the  office  would  be  by  appoint- 
ment of  the  state  finance  authority. 

In  some  states  the  auditors  perform  some  other  duties 
in  addition  to  their  financial  duties,  such  as  acting  as  sec- 
retary of  the  county  board.  It  is  clear  from  what  was 
said  in  the  discussion  of  the  treasurer's  office  about  the 
misuse  of  county  funds  that  control  of  accounting  and 
expenditure  of  county  funds  should  be  lodged  in  some 
officer.  But  it  seems  equally  clear  that  neither  local 
election  nor  local  appointment  will  secure  the  necessary 
control.  If  accounting  methods  are  prescribed,  as  they 
should  be,  by  the  state  authorities  all  that  would  be  needed 
for  the  county  would  be  a  competent  bookkeeper  among 
the  employees,  the  auditing  being  performed  by  agents 
of  the  central  government.     This  question  of  the  relation 

24  See  Fairlie,  op.  cit.,  p.  127. 


\yo  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  state  to  county  officers  and  county  activities  runs 
through  the  entire  problem  of  local  government  and  will 
have  to  be  referred  to  again  in  connection  with  the  dis- 
cussion of  county  activities,  the  organization  and  func- 
tions of  the  county  subdivisions  and  of  cities,  and  the 
relation  of  these  units  to  each  other  and  to  the  state. 

Clerical  Officers  of  the  County 

The  County  Clerks. —  In  the  discussion  of  the  clerks 
of  court  mention  was  made  of  the  fact  that  in  a  number 
of  the  states  this  office  is  combined  with  that  of  county 
clerk,  sometimes  under  the  one  name,  sometimes  under 
the  other.  The  method  of  selection,  qualifications,  term 
of  office,  and  the  duties  as  court  officials  have  already  been 
examined.  In  some  of  the  Middle  Western  and  Western 
states  there  is  a  county  clerk  in  addition  to  the  clerk  of 
court  and  this  officer  is  always  elected  by  popular  vote, 
usually  for  two  years. 

The  duties  of  the  county  clerk,  independent  of  his  con- 
nection with  the  courts,  are  very  varied  in  the  different 
states.  First  of  all  he  is  quite  frequently  charged  with 
the  duty  of  recording  deeds  and  other  instruments  relat- 
ing to  the  transfer  of  property,  the  county  being  almost 
universally  the  unit  for  keeping  such  records.  But  in 
half  of  the  states,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  next  section,  there 
are  special  officers  for  this  purpose.  Another  general 
function  of  the  county  clerk  is  that  of  preparing  the  bal- 
lots for  elections  and  of  receiving  the  election  returns. 
He  also  commonly  issues  marriage  licenses  and  in  some 
states  performs  functions  commonly  entrusted  to  other 
officers.  In  these  capacities  as  in  his  activities  as  clerk 
of  court  the  county  clerk  obviously  acts  not  as  a  local 
officer  but  as  an  agent  of  the  state. 

He  has  other   functions,   however,   that  are  just  as 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     171 

clearly  local  in  their  nature.  So,  he  is  frequently  the 
secretary  of  the  county  board,  though  as  has  been  seen, 
that  function  is  sometimes  entrusted  to  another  officer. 
In  practically  none  of  his  activities  does  he  perform  other 
than  ministerial  or  routine  functions,  hence  he  is  not  in 
any  proper  sense  a  political  officer  and  even  as  regards 
his  local  functions  should  not  be  chosen  by  popular  elec- 
tion. Where  he  acts  as  the  secretary  of  the  county  board 
and  keeper  of  all  strictly  county  records,  he  could  by  vir- 
tue of  ability  and  experience  become  the  most  important 
officer  for  purposes  of  county  administration,  especially 
in  the  absence  of  any  real  executive  head,  much  as  the 
county  clerk  and  the  town  clerk  in  England  constitute 
the  most  important  administrative  officers  of  those  units 
of  local  government.  For  this  purpose,  however,  he 
should  be  appointed  by  the  county  authority  for  an  in- 
definite term  and  hold  office  during  good  behavior,  in- 
stead of  being  popularly  elected  for  short  terms  as  is  now 
the  rule.  This  departure  from  the  present  mode  of  fill- 
ing the  office  would  be  desirable,  however,  whether  the 
county  clerk  is  to  develop  into  a  virtual  administrative 
advisor  to  the  county  board,  or  whether  some  other  office 
should  be  created  for  the  position  of  administrative  head 
of  the  county. 

The  Recorder  or  Register  of  Deeds. —  Officers  for 
the  recording  of  transfers  of  real  estate  were  very  gen- 
erally found  in  the  American  colonies,  although  not  found 
in  England,  where  titles  were  secure  and  transfers  rare. 
In  some  of  the  New  England  colonies,  the  recording  of 
titles  and  transfers  was  entrusted  to  town  officers,  and 
the  same  situation  exists  to-day  in  three  of  those  states. 
But  in  Virginia  and  the  other  colonies  generally  this 
duty  was  imposed  upon  the  county  either  by  lodging  it 
with  the  county  clerk  or  by  the  creation  of  a  new  office 


i72  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

for  the  registry  of  deeds.  To-day  more  than  half  of  the 
states  have  a  special  officer  for  this  purpose  in  all  or 
some  of  the  counties,  variously  called  the  recorder  or 
register  of  deeds.  In  a  third  of  the  states  the  office  ex- 
ists as  a  county  office  by  provision  of  the  constitution 
and  wherever  found  it  is  filled  by  popular  election  for 
a  term  varying  from  two  to  four  years.  In  the  states 
not  having  a  special  county  recorder  or  register  of  deeds, 
this  duty  is  usually  imposed  upon  the  county  clerk  or  the 
clerk  of  court,  and  in  a  few  instances  the  recorder  acts 
ex  officio  in  other  capacities.  The  recorder  is  commonly 
paid  by  fees  charged  for  the  recording  of  instruments  as 
authorized  by  law,  but  in  some  states,  notably  where  the 
salary  system  has  been  generally  introduced  for  county 
officers,  they  receive  a  fixed  salary.  No  special  qualifi- 
cations are  demanded  as  a  rule  for  this  office. 

The  chief  duties  of  the  recorder  or  register  of  deeds 
is  in  connection  with  the  entering  in  official  records  of 
all  transactions  affecting  the  title  to  real  estate,  the  gen- 
eral rule  being  that  while  such  entries  are  not  necessary 
to  the  validity  of  a  transaction,  and  do  not  constitute 
conclusive  evidence  of  title,  they  are  required  as  notice  to 
innocent  purchasers.  Other  transactions  that  are  re- 
quired by  the  laws  of  various  states  to  be  recorded  are 
frequently  entrusted  to  the  county  recorder. 

In  these  capacities  he  acts  in  the  execution  of  state 
laws,  not  in  the  interests  of  the  county  as  a  local  unit. 
There  is,  therefore,  no  justification  for  his  selection  by 
popular  election.  Furthermore,  his  duties  are  of  a  tech- 
nical nature,  particularly  in  the  matter  of  making  the 
records,  which  are  open  to  the  public,  readily  available 
by  proper  filing  and  indexing,  and  therefore  demand 
special  qualifications.  This  is  just  another  addition  to 
the  already  long  list  of  county  elective  offices  in  which 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     173 

the  voting  public  as  a  whole  has  little  interest  but  which 
the  county  political  organization  finds  useful  for  its  pur- 
poses. The  duties  of  this  office  should  be  performed  by 
an  official  under  state  authority  and  control,  so  far  as  they 
relate  to  the  matter  of  recording  instruments,  and  those 
local  duties  with  which  he  is  charged  in  some  states,  such 
as  acting  as  the  clerk  of  the  county  board,  should  be 
entrusted  to  a  truly  local  officer. 

The  County  Surveyor. —  Another  office  that  dates 
from  colonial  times  is  the  county  surveyor.  The  office 
was  one  of  considerable  importance  in  the  early  history 
of  the  states  because  of  the  necessity  of  establishing 
public  boundary  lines  and  the  description  of  private  prop- 
erty in  an  official  manner.  The  office  exists  as  a  special 
county  office  in  the  great  majority  of  states  to-day.  and 
is  established  by  constitutional  provision  in  more  than 
a  third  of  them.  The  chief  exceptions  to  the  states  hav- 
ing this  county  officer  are  the  New  England  states,  New 
York,  and  New  Jersey.  The  office  is  nearly  everywhere 
elective  for  a  term  of  from  two  to  four  years,  the  former 
term  being  the  more  common.  Special  qualifications  are 
not  as  a  rule  required  for  the  office.  Surveyors  are 
usually  paid  in  fees  as  their  activities  are  chiefly  for  the 
benefit  of  private  persons. 

The  duties  of  the  county  surveyor  have  been  chiefly  in 
connection  with  the  running  of  lines  for  the  owners  of 
private  property,  a  function  that  has  steadily  diminished 
in  importance  with  the  definite  establishment  of  property 
lines.  But  in  addition  to  this  the  surveyor  frequently 
performs  some  functions  for  the  county,  in  connection 
with  public  roads.  He  does  not,  however,  occupy  the 
position  of  county  engineer,  which  is  the  position  of  the 
surveyor  in  the  English  county.  It  would  seem  that  the 
office  in  its  present  condition  is  of  little  importance  but 


174  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

that  by  constituting  it  as  the  county  engineer's  office  and 
requiring  the  proper  qualifications  it  could  be  made  an 
important  office.  Very  clearly  it  should  not  be  filled  by 
popular  election  but  by  appointment  of  the  county  author- 
ity. In  a  large  number  of  states  special  county  road 
superintendents  or  engineers  have  recently  been  estab- 
lished, usually  to  be  filled  by  the  county  board,  and  there 
is  no  reason  for  having  both  offices. 

County  Education,  Health,  and  Poor-Relief 
Officers 

The  list  of  officers  commonly  found  in  counties  is  not 
yet  complete.  A  few  of  these  deserve  special  considera- 
tion either  because  of  their  importance  or  because  so 
generally  found. 

County  School  Authorities. —  In  the  New  England 
states  the  county  is  in  no  case  organized  as  a  school  dis- 
trict,25 but  otherwise  in  every  state  the  county  is  a  dis- 
trict either  of  direct  school  administration  or  of  super- 
vision over  smaller  school  districts.  The  county  school 
authorities  fall  into  two  classes,  county  superintendents 
of  schools  and  county  boards  of  education.  The  former 
officers  are  found  in  practically  all  of  the  states,  and  the 
boards  of  education  or  school  trustees  are  nearly  as  gen- 
eral. 

The  county  superintendent,  sometimes  appearing  under 
a  different  name,  is  chosen  in  a  majority  of  the  states  by 
popular  election.  But  in  a  number  of  states  he  is  ap- 
pointed, either  by  state  authorities  or  by  local  boards.20 

25  Updyke,  "County  Government  in  New  England,"  Annals  of 
the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  May,  1913. 
p.  27. 

26  See  Harrin,  "  County  Administration  of  School  Affairs,  etc.," 
in  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Sci- 
ence (May,  1913).  PP-  153  ff- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     175 

The  county  superintendent,  unlike  most  other  county 
officers,  is  commonly  required  to  have  some  special  edu- 
cational qualifications,  sometimes  to  a  considerable  ex- 
tent. But  even  here  there  are  some  states  that  do  not 
impose  any  such  qualifications  and  the  position  is  open 
to  any  one  who  can  secure  the  necessary  votes,  on  the 
same  basis  as  for  most  of  the  other  offices.  The  position 
is  not  generally  attractive  to  politicians,  however,  because, 
of  the  principal  county  offices  it  is  the  most  poorly  paid 
and  yields  the  smallest  opportunities  for  making  any- 
thing on  the  side.  The  position  is  paid  by  salary  and 
for  the  most  part  a  ludicrously  inadequate  one,  about 
the  only  full-time  public  offices  that  pay  less  being  those 
of  the  school  principals  and  the  teachers.  From  one 
thousand  dollars  to  two  thousand  would  seem  to  be  the 
scale  in  the  larger  states,  but  in  a  number  of  states  the 
average  falls  considerably  below  the  minimum  figure 
mentioned.  The  term  of  office  is  generally  the  same  as 
for  other  county  officers,  two  years  being  the  common 
period. 

The  duties  of  the  county  superintendent  vary  consid- 
erably in  the  different  states,  but  they  may  be  divided  in 
general  into  powers  of  direct  administration  and  of  su- 
pervision. In  a  number  of  the  Southern  states  the  county 
superintendent  has  direct  charge  of  the  school  administra- 
tion in  the  county.  Even  in  these  states,  however,  as 
in  most  of  the  other  states,  there  are  smaller  districts 
within  the  county,  and  the  county  superintendent  acts  in 
a  supervisory  capacity  over  these.  He  frequently  acts 
directly  as  the  agent  of  the  state  educational  authorities 
in  distributing  funds  in  aid  of  local  districts,  making  in- 
spections and  reports,  certifying  teachers  and  holding 
teachers'  institutes.  In  a  growing  number  of  states  there 
have  been  established  within  recent  years  supervisors  for 


176  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  state  authorities  in  addition  to  the  county  superin- 
tendents. Most  cities  and  towns  are  special  school  dis- 
tricts, not  under  the  supervision  of  the  county  superin- 
tendent, so  that  his  work  is  chiefly  in  connection  with 
the  rural  schools,  and  even  these  are  sometimes  organ- 
ized into  independent  school  districts.  In  some  cases 
the  county  superintendent  appoints  the  county  educational 
board  and  the  educational  authorities  in  the  smaller  dis- 
tricts. 

The  position  of  county  school  superintendent  is  un- 
questionably one  of  the  greatest  importance  in  the  system 
of  rural  education.  But  to  be  really  effective  it  should 
require  high  qualifications,  be  paid  one  of  the  highest 
instead  of  one  of  the  lowest  of  the  salaries  of  county 
officers,  and  be  subject  to  effective  state  supervision. 
Popular  election  is  obviously  not  the  proper  way  of 
choosing  such  officers.  Appointment  by  the  county  edu- 
cational authorities  would  seem  to  be  the  logical 
method  for  filling  this  post  if  the  county  is  recognized 
as  a  local  educational  unit.  If,  however,  his  functions 
are  to  be  wholly  supervisory  on  behalf  of  the  state  edu- 
cation authorities,  his  appointment  and  salary  should  both 
come  from  that  source.  If  he  is  to  act  in  both  capacities, 
which  is  the  general  rule,  his  appointment  might  be  local 
with  extensive  powers  of  control  by  the  state  and  his 
salary  paid  partly  by  the  state  and  partly  by  the  county. 
The  question  has  been  raised  whether  the  county  is  really 
a  proper  unit  for  school  administration  at  all  and  whether 
it  would  not  be  better  to  create  smaller  units  for  direct 
administration  and  larger  districts  for  supervisory  pur- 
poses. But  as  will  be  seen  in  other  parts  of  this  work, 
the  multiplication  of  special  districts  and  special  authori- 
ties is  one  of  the  weaknesses  of  the  system  of  local  gov- 
ernment in  the  United  States,  as  it  also  has  been  and  still 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     177 

is  in  England.  Inasmuch  as  the  county  is  the  universal 
basis  of  local  government  in  this  country  it  would  seem 
better  to  retain  it  as  the  unit  for  all  purposes  of  rural 
local  government,  including  education,  smaller  areas  be- 
ing subdivisions  of  the  county,  and,  where  necessary, 
counties  being  authorized  to  unite  for  undertakings  that 
exceed  the  resources  of  individual  counties.  It  is,  of 
course,  the  geographical  extent  of  the  typical  county 
rather  than  the  matter  of  population  that  makes  the  prob- 
lem of  county  schools  difficult,  but  the  movement  towards 
the  consolidated  rural  school  is  pointing  the  way  towards 
greater  centralization.  With  the  growth  of  the  good 
roads  movement,  to  be  noted  later,  and  the  provision  of 
means  of  transportation,  the  furnishing  of  secondary 
education  by  county  high  schools  may  in  a  considerable 
number  of  counties  come  to  be  an  important  function. 

While  the  superintendent  is  charged  with  the  educa- 
tional aspects  of  school  administration,  there  is  usually 
a  county  board  of  education  or  of  school  trustees  to  at- 
tend to  the  business  aspects  of  the  work,  such  as  the 
erection  of  buildings,  the  control  of  the  property,  the  ex- 
penditure of  funds,  and  sometimes  the  appointment  of 
teachers  and  of  the  subordinate  educational  authorities. 
These  boards  are  in  some  cases  elected  by  popular  vote,  in 
others  by  state  authorities,  and  in  still  others  by  county 
authorities.     In  some  states  the  county   superintendent 
himself   appoints  the  county  boards.     This  position   is 
not  salaried,  though  per  diem  or  traveling  expenses  are 
commonly  allowed.     It  is  questionable  whether  there  is 
any  justification  for  a  special  authority  for  this  purpose  as 
there  is  already  a  county  authority   with  similar  gen- 
eral powers  to  which  the  management  of  the  business 
aspects  of  the  county  school  system  should  properly  be 
entrusted.     Special  boards  for  education  are  character- 


178  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

istic  of  the  American  system  of  administration,  both  state 
and  local,  and  are  found  in  the  cities  and  county  subdivi- 
sions as  well  as  in  the  county.  The  question  of  the  wis- 
dom of  this  traditional  arrangement  and  its  relation  to 
the  general  problem  of  governmental  administration 
will  be  considered  again  at  a  later  point. 

County  Health  Authorities. —  In  a  large  and  grow- 
ing number  of  states  there  are  special  health  authorities 
in  the  counties,  though  this  development  is  comparatively 
recent.  These  authorities,  like  the  school  authorities,  are 
of  two  classes,  the  health  board  and  the  medical  officer 
of  health.  The  county  health  officer  or  county  physi- 
cian is  found  in  most  of  the  states,  especially  in  the 
South  and  the  West,  but  the  movement  is  taking  hold  in 
all  parts  of  the  Union.  The  health  officers,  unlike  the 
rest  of  the  county  officials  so  far  discussed,  are  appointed 
instead  of  elected.  The  appointment  is  generally  vested 
in  the  county  boards,  but  in  some  cases  it  is  made  by  the 
local  health  board.  In  a  considerable  number  of  states 
the  central  health  authority  exercises  power  of  appoint- 
ment over  the  county  health  authorities,  and  in  other  in- 
stances the  Governor  or  higher  courts  make  the  appoint- 
ments. In  some  cases  the  central  authorities  have  also 
the  power  of  removal,  and  in  a  considerable  number  of 
states  the  central  health  authority  may  make  appoint- 
ments in  case  the  local  board  fails  to  do  so. 

The  law  usually  prescribes  that  the  county  health  officer 
shall  be  a  practicing  physician  of  reputable  standing,  and 
although  this  serves  to  insure  a  minimum  of  medical 
knowledge,  it  is  doubtful  whether  restricting  the  office  to 
practicing  physicians  is  not  likely  to  be  productive  of 
more  harm  than  good.  The  average  practicing  physician, 
especially  of  the  caliber  usually  willing  to  serve  in  this 
capacity,  it  not  likely  to  be  a  trained  sanitarian  and  may 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION      179 

be  quite  unfit  for  the  administrative  duties  required  of 
the  health  officer.  New  Jersey  led  the  way  in  requiring 
in  1905  that  health  officers  must  pass  a  state  examination 
to  qualify  for  their  positions,  and  other  states  are  taking 
steps  to  follow  in  that  direction. 

County   health   boards   are  provided   in    some   states, 
which  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  the  county  health  of- 
ficer that  the  school  boards  do  to  the  superintendent. 
But  generally  the  county  boards  act  as  the  general  health 
authority  and  in  a  few  cases  they  have  been  given  power 
to  adopt  quarantine  and  other  sanitary  measures.     Gen- 
erally, however,  their  chief  function  in  this  regard  is  to 
appoint  the  health  officer  who  carries  out  the  provisions  of 
the  state  sanitary  laws.     There   would   seem  to  be  no 
reason  for  a  separate  county  health  board  as  such  powers 
of  local  legislation  in  sanitary  matters  as  are  accorded 
to  the  county  could  be  performed  by  the  county  board. 
But  the  question  arises  again  as  to  the  best  method  of  ap- 
pointing the  county  health  officer.     If   his    function   is 
purely  that  of  carrying  into  effect  state  sanitary  laws, 
appointment  by  state  authorities  would  seem  to  be  the 
logical  manner  of   selection,   state   and   county   sharing 
in  the  payment  of  his  salary,  since  the  county  is  directly 
benefited.     But  if  the  county  also  enjoys  a  field  of  san- 
itary legislation,  the  health  officer  performs  local  func- 
tions as  well  as  state  functions  and  the  selection  could 
properly  be  left  in  the  county  board,  under  conditions 
imposed  by  the  state  as  to  qualifications  and  salary.     In 
either  event  the  health  officer  should  be  a  full-time  officer 
and  receive  a  salary  sufficient  to  attract  capable  men  into 
this  field.     At  present  the  salaries  paid  are  such  as  to 
attract  only  unsuccessful  or  broken-down  physicians,  or 
else  to  necessitate  a  combination  of  private  practice  and 
public  duties  which  is  positively  detrimental  to  effective 


180  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

service.27  Combinations  of  counties  into  larger  health 
districts  where  the  work  in  a  single  county  is  not  suffi- 
cient to  occupy  the  full-time  health  officer  is  preferable  to 
part-time  employment. 

Frequently  the  duties  of  the  county  health  officer  in 
carrying  into  effect  the  provisions  of  the  sanitary  code 
are  combined  with  the  local  function  of  caring  for  the 
indigent  sick  and  the  inmates  of  county  institutions,  such 
services  usually  being  paid  by  fees.  These  are,  however, 
in  their  nature  two  distinct  functions  and  should  not  be 
combined  in  the  same  officer.  Practicing  physicians  to 
take  care  of  this  phase  of  the  work  can  well  be  employed 
at  part  time,  where  a  full-time  physician  is  not  needed, 
and  paid  on  the  basis  of  the  services  rendered. 

In  some  states  in  recent  years  state  sanitary  inspectors 
for  larger  districts  than  the  county  have  been  appointed, 
analogous  in  functions  to  the  supervisors  of  education, 
and  standing  in  the  same  relation  to  the  county  health 
officer  as  that  of  the  supervisors  to  the  county  superin- 
tendent of  schools.  Furthermore,  as  in  the  case  of 
schools,  so  with  regard  to  public  health,  there  are  in  a 
number  of  states  smaller  districts  within  the  county, 
either  coextensive  with  the  subdivisions  for  general  gov- 
ernmental purposes,  as  in  the  case  of  incorporated  cities 
and  towns,  the  New  England  towns,  and  in  some  cases 
the  township,  or  else  special  health  districts  performing 
only  sanitary  functions.  But  the  situation  is  different  in 
the  case  of  public  health  from  that  of  public  education, 
for  while  the  latter  demands  schools  at  convenient  loca- 
tions and,  therefore,  for  geographically  small  areas,  the 
former  demands  more  and  more  extensive  areas  of  con- 
trol as  population  becomes  more  settled  and  intercourse 
of  persons  and  commodities,  particularly  foods,  becomes 

27  See  Hemenway,  American  Public  Health  Protection. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      181 

more  extensive.  The  county,  therefore,  seems  to  be  a 
more  natural  unit  for  health  administration  than  for  edu- 
cational administration  and  the  growth  in  importance  of 
the  county  health  officer  is  to  be  expected. 

Quite  recently  county  public  health  nurses  have  begun 
to  be  appointed  in  a  number  of  states,  a  movement  in 
which  the  American  Red  Cross  is  taking  an  active  inter- 
est and  furnishing  aid.  Their  work  is  in  aiding  the 
county  health  officers  along  special  lines  and  particularly 
in  the  dissemination  of  advice  and  information  in  public 
and  private  hygiene. 

County  Poor  Officers. —  The  last  class  to  be  consid- 
ered here  of  county  officers  commonly  found  in  the  states 
of  the  Union  are  the  special  officers  in  charge  of  poor 
relief.  Poor  relief  is  one  of  the  earliest  of  the  functions 
entrusted  to  the  county  in  this  country,  and  while  in  most 
states  this  activity  falls  under  the  direct  control  of  the 
county  board,  a  considerable  number  of  states  include 
among  county  officers  a  special  superintendent  or  commis- 
sioner, elected  in  a  few  cases  by  popular  vote.  The 
duties  of  this  officer  in  general  are  to  superintend  the 
county  poorhouses  or  poor  farms,  while  outdoor  relief  is 
usually  extended  by  direct  action  of  the  county  board. 
Although  in  the  care  of  the  poor  the  county  is  performing 
a  state  function,  there  is  little  state  aid  and  as  yet  but 
little  effective  state  supervision,  though,  as  will  be  seen, 
the  tendency  is  distinctly  in  the  latter  direction,  combined 
with  direct  state  administration  of  certain  aspects  of  char- 
ity formerly  left  to  the  counties  if  performed  at  all.  In 
this  field,  one  of  the  oldest  of  the  activities  of  the  county 
in  this  country,  but  little  progress  has  been  made  in  the 
two  centuries  and  more  since  it  was  first  undertaken,  but 
as  will  be  seen  later  on,  even  here  there  are  within  recent 
years  encouraging  signs  of  improvement. 


1 82  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Miscellaneous  County  Officers 

It  would  be  tedious  as  well  as  unprofitable  to  attempt 
an  enumeration  of  all  the  functionaries  that  appear  here 
and  there  as  county  officers.  A  mere  mention  of  a  few 
of  them  will  serve  to  show  how  varied  they  are.  Elisors, 
high  bailiffs,  measurers,  jailers,  liners,  marshals,  rangers, 
road  and  revenue  commissioners,  sergeants,  wreck  mas- 
ters, and  inspectors  of  various  kinds,  all  figure,  with  a 
number  of  others,  in  one  or  more  states  as  county  officers. 
Their  chief  significance  lies  in  the  added  light  thrown  by 
their  existence  on  the  already  sufficiently  apparent  com- 
plexity of  the  county  organization,  especially  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  these  officers,  like  those  already  considered, 
are  generally  chosen  by  popular  election,  thus  still  further 
befuddling  the  task  of  the  voter  and  diminishing  the  co- 
herence of  county  organization. 

County  Employees. —  In  addition  to  the  large  num- 
ber of  county  officers  and  their  deputies,  county  govern- 
ment involves  the  hiring  of  a  number  of  employees,  vary- 
ing, of  course,  with  the  size  of  the  county  and  the  extent 
and  character  of  its  activities,  but  contributing  in  many 
cases  very  materially  to  the  cost  of  county  government. 
An  illustration  of  the  extensiveness  of  the  payroll  in  a 
typical  urban  county  of  considerable  size,  though  not  in 
the  largest  class,  may  be  seen  in  Milwaukee  County,  Wis- 
consin, where  according  to  an  investigation  made  in 
191 5,28  there  were,  in  addition  to  forty-three  elected 
county  officials,  some  six  hundred  deputies,  assistants,  and 
employees,  not  counting  those  employed  intermittently  on 
the  county  roads.  The  salary  item  alone,  in  a  county 
budget  of  two  and  a  half  millions  amounted  to  $400,000. 

28  Milwaukee  County  Government,  in  Documents  on  County  Gov- 
ernment, op.  cit. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION      183 

When  it  is  remembered  that  none  of  these  officers  or  em- 
ployees is  selected  on  the  merit  principle  of  competitive 
civil  service  examinations,  it  is  clear  what  an  opportunity 
this  gives  for  the  operation  of  the  spoils  system  and  how 
important  the  control  over  all  these  positions  becomes  to 
the  county  machine.  Approximately  the  same  situation 
exists  in  a  relative  degree  in  all  counties,  for  the  civil 
service  merit  system  has  been  adopted  so  far  in  an  almost 
negligible  number  of  counties,  when  compared  to  the 
total  number. 

Naturally,  political  considerations  govern  not  only  to 
whom  these  posts  shall  go,  but  also  the  number  of  berths 
that  should  be  provided  at  public  expense  for  deserving 
henchmen.  An  interesting  anecdote  is  told  of  a  certain 
New  Jersey  county  in  which  one  of  the  elective  officials 
needed  two  additional  clerks.  He  asked  the  county  board 
for  four  on  the  supposition  that  his  request  would  be  cut 
in  half,  but  to  his  surprise  was  told  by  a  member  of  the 
board,  which  was  of  opposite  political  faith  from  him, 
that  he  needed  not  four  but  eight  new  men.  Quick  to  take 
the  hint  the  officer  passed  around  eight  salaried  jobs,  four 
to  members  of  his  own  party,  four  to  those  of  the  oppo- 
site party,  when  only  two  were  needed.29  Whether  this 
particular  story  is  historical  or  symbolical  merely,  its  les- 
son is  forced  home  by  the  fact  that  almost  every  careful 
investigation  of  county  personnel  has  shown  that  the  num- 
ber of  employees  is  excessive  when  compared  to  the  work 
to  be  done. 

The  remedy  for  this  situation  is  clear  enough.  A  scien- 
tific county  budget  based  on  efficiency  and  office  records 
would  set  forth  the  actual  needs  of  the  county  in  this 
regard,  and  the  civil  service  merit  system  would  tend,  if 

29  See  Paul,  "The  County  Employee,"  in  Annals  of  the  American 
Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science  (May,  1913),  p.  81. 


1 84  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

properly  administered,  to  substitute  personal  fitness  for 
party  service  as  a  condition  of  securing  such  positions  as 
are  properly  needed.  Progress  in  this  direction  in  recent 
years  is  one  of  the  encouraging  signs  in  the  movement 
for  improved  county  government,  but  up  to  the  present 
such  improved  conditions  are  so  rare  as  scarcely  to  de- 
stroy the  universality  of  the  sad  picture  of  county  em- 
ployment as  a  dumping  ground  for  incompetents,  in- 
efficient in  everything  but  party  service.  Improvement 
in  this  direction  is  the  sine  qua  non  of  progress  in  county 
administrative  organization.30 

Summary  of  County  Organization. —  To  summarize 
the  characteristics  of  county  organization  as  set  forth  in 
the  preceding  pages  it  may  be  said  ( i )  that  the  originally 
plenary  powers  of  the  state  legislature  over  the  establish- 
ment of  counties  and  their  organization  and  activities 
have  been  curtailed  in  a  marked  degree  by  the  incorpora- 
tion into  the  state  constitutions  of  specific  and  detailed 
provisions  relating  to  the  constitution  and  organization 
of  these  areas  of  government,  leaving  in  many  cases 
little  to  be  done  by  the  legislature  and  small  opportunity 
for  change,  except  by  the  tedious  and  usually  difficult 
process  of  constitutional  amendment;  (2)  that  county 
organization,  almost  without  exception,  is  characterized 
by  a  large  number  of  independent  administrative  officers 
elected  for  short  terms  by  popular  vote,  paid  by  the  fee 
system,  and  not  requiring  any  special  qualifications  for 
the  posts,  whatever  the  nature  of  their  duties;  (3)  that 
there  is  no  representative  body  with  general  powers  of 

30  See  also  an  article  by  Belcher,  "The  Merit  System  and  the 
County  Civil  Service,"  in  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of 
Political  and  Social  Science  (May,  1913),  PP-  101  ff->  and  reports  on 
the  situation  in  special  states  and  counties  in  the  collection  of 
Documents  on  County  Government,  prepared  by  the  National  Short 
Ballot  Organization. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT :  ORGANIZATION     185 

local  legislation,  the  county  board  being  chiefly  an  ad- 
ministrative body  without  any  single  executive  head; 
(4)  that  the  officers  of  the  county  are  principally  charged 
with  duties  relating  to  the  local  administration  of  state 
affairs  and  only  secondarily  engaged  in  strictly  local  func- 
tions ;  ( 5  )  that  there  is  almost  no  adequate  control  by  the 
state  over  these  officers,  and  (6)  that  the  appointive  po- 
sitions in  the  county  service  are  subject  to  the  free  opera- 
tion of  the  spoils  system  without  any  legal  limitations  in 
the  interests  of  competency  and  efficiency. 


CHAPTER  IV 
THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  COUNTY  GOVERNMENT » 

The  Legal  Nature  and  Position  of  the  County.2 — 

The  county  in  England  was  not,  until  the  reform  legisla- 
tion at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century,  recognized  as  a 

1  There  is  an  unfortunate  lack  of  material  available  on  the  activ- 
ities of  American  counties  in  general.  Fairlie,  Local  Government 
in  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages,  is  much  less  complete  in  its 
treatment  of  the  actual  activities  of  the  counties  than  it  is  in  the 
description  of  the  organization,  though  the  two  phases  are  treated 
together  to  a  certain  extent.  Gilbertson,  The  County,  devotes  sev- 
eral chapters  to  particular  phases  of  county  activity  which  have 
been  found  to  be  especially  poorly  managed,  and  a  chapter  to  recent 
developments  of  an  encouraging  nature  in  the  functions  of  the 
county.  The  volume  of  the  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of 
Political  and  Social  Science  on  "County  Government"  (May,  1913), 
contains  some  papers  on  special  phases  of  county  activity  in  par- 
ticular states.  The  collection  of  Documents  on  County  Govern- 
ment, issued  by  the  National  Short  Ballot  Organization,  comprises 
some  investigations,  papers,  and  reports  dealing  with  the  matter 
of  county  activities  as  distinguished  from  county  organization,  and 
special  monographs  describing  the  activities  of  particular  counties 
in  connection  with  their  governmental  organization  have  been  issued 
by  the  New  York  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research  and  other  organi- 
zations, general  and  local. 

The  chief  source  of  information  on  the  extent  of  county  func- 
tions is,  however,  the  volume  of  the  Thirteenth  Census  entitled 
County  Revenues,  Expenditures,  and  Public  Properties,  issued  in 
1915.  Taken  together  with  the  census  volumes  on  County  and 
Municipal  Indebtedness,  and  on  Assessed  Valuation  of  Property  and 
Amounts  and  Rates  of  Levy,  issued  in  the  same  year,  this  statis- 
tical information  furnishes  the  most  complete  picture  available  of 
what  the  counties  really  do,  so  far  as  the  raising  of  revenues  and 
the  distribution  of  expenditures  can  furnish  such  a  picture. 

2  See  Dillon,  Municipal  Corporations,  fifth  edition  (Boston,  1911). 

186 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     187 

public  corporation,  but  was  regarded  purely  and  simply  as 
an  administrative  subdivision  for  the  convenient  admin- 
istration of  state  affairs.  In  this  respect,  it  will  be  re- 
membered, the  county  differed  fundamentally  from  the 
borough,  which  latter  possessed  certain  powers  at  com- 
mon law  by  virtue  of  being  a  corporation,  in  addition  to 
such  privileges  and  powers  as  might  be  included  in  the 
charter  granted  to  it.  In  the  American  colonies,  in  the 
same  way,  the  county  was  not  a  corporation  but  merely 
an  administrative  subdivision  of  the  state.  As  such  it 
could  not  hold  property,  nor  sue  or  be  sued  in  the  courts. 
As  a  county  it  had  no  rights  at  all.  This  is  the  common- 
law  rule  in  the  United  States  to-day,  except  so  far  as 
modified  by  constitution  or  statute. 

As  early  as  1801,  however,  the  county  was  made  capa- 
ble of  receiving  and  holding  land  in  New  York  State, 
and  in  1829  counties  were  made  bodies  corporate  there, 
with  the  power  to  hold  property  and  to  sue  and  be  sued.3 
The  desirability  of  conferring  these  corporate  character- 
istics on  counties  became  apparent  in  other  states  also, 
and  to-day  in  most  states  by  legislation  and  in  at  least 
seven  states  by  constitutional  provision  counties  are  cre- 
ated bodies  corporate,  or  bodies  politic  and  corporate. 

But  although  counties  have  commonly  been  created 
public  corporations  their  status  in  this  regard  is  different 
from  that  of  incorporated  urban  units.  In  the  first  place 
counties  do  not,  except  in  a  very  few  cases  so  far,  possess 
charters,  such  as  are  commonly  conferred  upon  the  larger 
urban  units.  In  California  and  Maryland  within  recent 
years  counties  have  been  given  power  to  frame  and  adopt 
their  own  charters,  and  in  some  of  the  cases  where  cities 
and  counties  are  coterminous,  the  charter  covers  both  the 
city  and  the   county  organization,   but  elsewhere,   even 

3Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  pp.  172,  173. 


1 88  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

for  the  largest  counties,  the  organization  and  powers  of 
the  county  are  determined  by  general  or  special  provisions 
in  the  laws  and  not  embodied  in  the  form  of  a  charter. 

In  the  second  place,  while  cities  and  towns  are  usually 
designated  as  municipal  corporations,  counties  are  ordi- 
narily considered  as  gwoyi-corporations  only,  to  indicate 
their  incomplete  powers  as  compared  with  cities.  This 
distinction  is  derived  from  a  number  of  considerations, 
chiefly  based  on  the  old  common-law  principle  that  while 
municipal  corporations  are  created  primarily  for  the  sat- 
isfaction of  local  needs  and  only  incidentally  perform 
general  state  functions,  counties  are  created  for  the  per- 
formance of  general  and  not  local  functions.  But  as  has 
been  remarked  before,  this  ground  for  distinction  has 
tended  to  disappear  more  and  more  since  counties  have 
been  charged  with  an  ever  increasing  number  of  general 
governmental  or  state  functions.  Another  basis  for  this 
distinction  to  be  found  in  the  judicial  decisions,  is  the 
fact  that  municipal  corporations  are  created  at  the  re- 
quest of  or  at  least  with  the  consent  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  area  to  be  incorporated  while  counties  and  other 
quasi-corporations  are  imposed  upon  the  inhabitants  with- 
out reference  to  their  wishes.  But  apart  from  constitu- 
tional limitations  the  state  legislatures  are  absolutely  free 
to  incorporate  cities,  not  only  without  the  consent  of  the 
inhabitants  concerned  but  even  against  their  expressed 
desires,  and  that  has  indeed  been  done,  while  on  the  other 
hand  not  only  constitutional  provisions  but  legislative  en- 
actments as  well  have  made  provision  for  securing  the 
approval  of  a  majority  of  the  local  electors  for  the  cre- 
ation of  a  new  county.  This  basis  for  the  distinction  be- 
tween cities  as  municipal  corporations  and  counties  as 
quasi-corporations  is,  therefore,  not  sound  in  law  nor  is 
it  generally  true  to-day  in  fact. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     189 

But  there  is  a  legal  distinction  between  the  corporate 
capacity  of  the  city  and  the  county  as  regards  the  prop- 
erty held  by  each.  While  it  has  been  held  that  the  pri- 
vate property  of  a  city  —  that  is,  property  owned  by  the 
city  but  not  used  for  a  public  purpose  —  cannot  be  taken 
away  from  it  by  the  legislature,  the  property  of  the 
county,  whatever  its  character,  is  really  the  property  of 
the  state  and  may  be  taken  by  it  for  other  purposes. 

Fourthly,  the  county  as  a  g  wan-corporation  has  no 
inherent  or  implied  power  to  borrow  money  for  corporate 
purposes,  or  to  issue  negotiable  evidences  of  debt,  whereas 
some  states  have  held  that  municipal  corporations  proper 
possess  an  implied  power  to  borrow  money  for  the  exe- 
cution of  corporate  purposes  for  which  money  is  required, 
and,  that  the  power  to  issue  negotiable  instruments  of 
indebtedness  may  properly  be  implied  from  a  grant  of 
power  to  borrow  money.  This  view  with  regard  to  the 
borrowing  powers  of  cities  or  municipal  corporations  is 
not,  however,  generally  accepted,  and  the  better  view 
seems  to  hold  that  in  this  fact  lies  one  of  the  important 
distinctions  between  public  and  private  corporations,  only 
the  latter  deriving  powers  of  this  nature  from  the  fact  of 
their  incorporation. 

Fifthly,  there  is  a  distinction  between  the  liability  to 
suit  in  tort  of  a  county  as  a  gwayi-corporation  and  a  city 
as  a  municipal  corporation.  The  almost  universal  rule 
with  regard  to  counties  is,  that  although  their  corporate 
character  makes  them  liable  to  suit  in  contract  or  quasi- 
contract  on  the  same  basis  as  private  corporations,  there 
is  no  liability  in  tort  for  the  wrongful  acts  or  omissions 
of  county  officers  which  cause  injury  to  others,  unless 
such  a  liability  is  imposed  by  statutory  provisions.  Mu- 
nicipal corporations  proper,  on  the  other  hand,  are  by  the 
general  rule  subject  to  liability  as  corporations  for  torts 


190  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

committed  by  their  officers  in  the  performance  of  corpo- 
rate as  distinguished  from  governmental  functions.4 
This  distinction,  logically  founded  on  the  original  differ- 
ence between  counties  as  performing  no  local  corporate 
but  only  general  state  functions,  and  cities  as  existing 
primarily  for  local  corporate  purposes,  has  been  continued 
in  spite  of  the  development  of  local  corporate  powers  of 
counties,  so  that  to-day  a  county  will  not  be  held  liable 
in  damages,  when  a  city  in  exactly  the  same  case  would 
be  held  liable.  By  statute  a  number  of  states  have  im- 
posed a  liability  on  counties  for  the  proper  maintenance 
of  county  roads  and  property,  the  protection  of  persons 
and  property  against  violence,  or  even  a  general  liability 
similar  to  that  of  municipal  corporations  proper.  The 
constitution  of  South  Carolina,  for  instance,  expressly 
imposes  a  liability  of  not  less  than  $2,000  on  a  county 
where  a  lynching  takes  place,  without  regard  to  the  con- 
duct of  officers,  while  four  other  state  constitutions  ex- 
pressly exempt  the  county  from  liability  for  acts  of  the 
sheriff. 

Finally,  it  may  be  noted  that  in  some  states  by  consti- 
tution and  in  others  by  statute,  these  common-law  distinc- 
tions between  counties  and  cities  have  been  done  away 
with  by  the  indiscriminate  application  of  the  term  "  mu- 
nicipal corporations  "  to  both  classes  of  governmental 
units. 

Aside  from  the  powers  arising  from  the  corporate 
character  of  the  county  only  such  powers  may  be  exercised 
as  are  expressly  conferred  by  constitution  or  by  statute. 
The  legislature  in  the  absence  of  constitutional  restric- 
tions may  not  only,  as  has  been  noted,  create,  alter,  and 
abolish  counties,  as  well  as  determine  their  form  of  gov- 

4  For  a  discussion  of  the  liabilities  in  suit  of  municipal  corpora-. 
tions  proper,  see  below,  pp.  365  ff. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     191 

ernmental  organization,  but  may  also  fix  the  measure  of 
their  powers  and  responsibilities,  subject  always  to  such 
limitations  as  may  have  been  inserted  into  the  constitu- 
tions. What  these  limitations  with  regard  to  the  or- 
ganization of  county  government  are  has  been  indicated  in 
the  preceding  chapter.  We  will  now  consider  briefly  the 
chief  constitutional  restrictions  affecting  the  freedom  of 
the  state  legislatures  in  dealing  with  the  governmental 
powers  to  be  exercised  by  the  county  or  by  county  officers. 

Before  considering  the  restrictions  found  in  the  state 
constitutions,  however,  it  will  be  necessary  to  note  that 
there  are  some  prohibitive  provisions  in  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  which  limit  the  freedom  of 
state  legislatures  in  conferring  powers  on  counties  and 
county  officers.  As  regards  the  organization  of  county 
government  there  are  virtually  only  the  provisions  of  the 
Fifteenth  and  Nineteenth  Amendments,  referring  to  the 
denial  of  the  right  to  vote  because  of  race  or  sex.  But  as 
regards  the  powers  to  be  conferred  on  counties  and  their 
officers  the  limitations  of  the  Federal  Constitution  assume 
a  much  more  important  role,  since  everything  which  the 
states  are  prohibited  from  doing  is  also  put  beyond  the 
power  of  their  delegation  to  subordinate  agencies. 

It  is  not  possible  within  the  range  of  a  brief  treatise 
on  local  government  to  enter  in  detail  into  a  discussion 
of  these  prohibitions  and  their  application  by  the  courts. 
It  is  sufficient  merely  to  point  out  that  the  most  important 
of  these,  namely  the  provision  of  the  Fourteenth  Amend- 
ment prohibiting  states  from  depriving  any  person  of 
life,  liberty,  or  property  without  due  process  of  law  ap- 
plies to  the  exercise  of  powers  by  counties  or  county  of- 
ficers especially  in  the  exercise  of  judicial  functions,  legis- 
lative functions,  and  the  taxing  powers. 

Similarly,  the  provisions  of  state  constitutions  safe- 


192  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

guarding  individual  life,  liberty,  and  property,  limit  the 
state  legislatures  not  only  as  regards  direct  action  by 
them  but  also  in  the  powers  they  may  confer  on  subor- 
dinate agencies  of  government.  But  these  limitations, 
like  those  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  are  intended  to 
safeguard  private  rights  in  general  against  governmental 
invasion.  It  was  soon  found,  however,  that  the  local 
units  of  government  themselves,  and  the  people  who  con- 
stituted them,  were  in  need  of  protection  against  undue 
and  improper  interference  by  the  legislatures.  This  led, 
as  has  been  seen,  to  the  insertion  into  many  of  the  con- 
stitutions after  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  of 
detailed  provisions  and  express  prohibitions  concerning 
the  organization  and  powers  of  local  government.  The 
most  important  of  these  so  far  as  the  powers  of  counties 
are  concerned  are  to  be  found  in  the  prohibitions  against 
special  or  local  legislation  regulating  the  affairs  of  coun- 
ties. Such  a  general  prohibition  is  to  be  found  in  over 
a  third  of  the  state  constitutions,  while  special  restrictions 
on  particular  aspects  of  county  functions  are  to  be  found 
in  the  majority  of  constitutions. 

One  reason  for  the  very  general  insertion  of  such 
provisions  lay  in  the  tendency  of  legislatures  to  make 
special  provisions  for  particular  counties  when  such  pro- 
visions were  useful  to  the  party  in  power  in  the  legislature 
or  to  the  political  organization  in  control  of  the  county. 
In  providing  jobs  for  deserving  politicians,  in  making  con- 
tracts for  public  works  or  supplies,  in  granting  franchises 
or  licenses,  a  particular  county  might  be  too  limited  under 
the  general  laws  or  too  slow  in  using  the  power  it  pos- 
sessed to  suit  the  forces  with  influence  in  the  legislature. 
Hence  new  powers  might  have  to  be  granted  or  direct 
obligations  imposed  by  law  on  a  particular  county,  with 
no  reference  to  local  needs  or  desires.     One  way  to  put 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     193 

a  stop  to  such  practices  which  left  each  individual  county 
at  the  mercy  of  the  legislature  was  thought  to  be  the  inser- 
tion of  a  requirement  in  the  constitution  that  county  af- 
fairs should  not  be  regulated  by  special  law  but  that  all 
counties  or  none  must  be  affected,  thus  enabling  the  com- 
bined opposition  of  all  county  electors  to  defeat  undesir- 
able proposals  in  the  legislature. 

It  is  a  curious  paradox  in  this  situation,  as  in  the  iden- 
tical situation  that  arose  with  regard  to  cities,  that  these 
measures  by  going  too  far  did  not  go  far  enough.  In 
view  of  the  enormous  differences  in  counties  already 
noted  as  regards  geographical  area,  density  and  character 
of  population,  and  resources,  even  within  the  bounds  of 
a  single  state,  absolute  uniformity  of  treatment  would  be 
as  undesirable  as  would  be  injudicious  variations.  Con- 
sequently the  courts  in  applying  this  constitutional  limita- 
tion have  been  inclined  to  permit  the  classification  of 
counties  and  the  passing  of  special  laws  for  all  counties 
in  a  particular  class.  Under  this  view,  therefore,  coun- 
ties may  be  divided  into  classes  according  to  population 
for  the  purpose  of  assessing  property  for  taxation,  or  for 
the  purpose  of  regulating  the  compensation  of  officers, 
and  in  other  matters  where  population  furnishes  a  reason- 
able basis  for  discrimination.5  But  under  cover  of  this 
modification  some  state  legislatures  have  simply  nullified 
the  constitutional  prohibitions  in  this  regard  by  adopt- 
ing a  classification  of  counties  according  to  population 
which  places  each  county  in  a  class  by  itself,  and  then 
legislating  specifically  for  each  county  without  naming 
the  county  but  referring  merely  to  its  class.6 

The   specific  constitutional   limitations   imposed   upon 

5  Dillon,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  I,  Sec.  170. 

8  See  with  regard  to  California,  Illinois,  and  New  Jersey,  Gilbert- 
son,  The  County,  pp.  115,  116. 


194  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

state  legislatures  with  regard  to  the  nature  and  extent 
of  county  functions  can  more  conveniently  be  noted  in 
connection  with  the  discussion  of  the  various  activities 
concerned. 

County  Functions  in  General. —  Originally,  as  has 
been  seen,  counties  in  the  American  colonies  were  estab- 
lished almost  purely  as  judicial,  election,  and  militia  dis- 
tricts.    Later  they  became  districts  for  highways,  poor 
relief,  education,  sanitation,  taxation,  public  works,  recre- 
ation, and  miscellaneous  functions,  varying  in  extent  in 
different  states  and  at  different  times.     But  until  counties 
became  local  corporations,  the  law  recognized  no  distinc- 
tion between  state  functions  performed  by  the  county  and 
local  functions  performed  by  it,  and  even  to-day  there  is 
only  a  very  limited  recognition  of  the  possession  by  the 
county  of  a  sphere  of  local  action.     Viewed  from  the 
angle  of  the  source  of  authority,  the  powers  of  the  county 
are,  of  course,  primarily  state  powers.     Viewed  from  the 
angle  of  the  kind  of  officers  who  exercise  the  powers,  they 
are  local  powers,  though  in  contemplation  of  law  county 
officers,  even  though  not  popularly  elected  and  not  subject 
to  state  administrative  control,  are  state  not  local  officers. 
Examined  from  the  point  of  view  of  whether  the  powers 
are  primarily  of  concern  to  the  state  as  a  whole  or  chiefly 
affect  the  welfare  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  county,  the 
activities  of  the  county  include  both  classes  of  functions. 
It  is  obviously  impossible  to  make  a  hard  and  fast  classi- 
fication under  this  last  head  since  opinions  will  necessar- 
ily differ  as  to  the  relative  interests  of  the  state  and  the 
locality  in  the  exercise  of  particular  functions.     If,  how- 
ever, we  adopt  as  a  basis  of  determination  the  powers 
which  have  been  conferred  upon  cities,  regarded  as  agen- 
cies  primarily   for   the   satisfaction   of  local   needs,   we 
find  that  many  of  the  functions  now  performed  by  coun^ 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     195 

ties  should  be  considered  as  local  rather  than  state  activi- 
ties. 

The  administration  of  justice,  the  conduct  of  state  elec- 
tions, the  assessment  and  collection  of  state  taxes,  the 
recording  of  deeds,  the  probating  of  wills,  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  militia,  seem  clearly  to  be  functions  that  are 
primarily  of  state-wide  rather  than  local  concern.  The 
conduct  of  local  elections,  the  protection  of  life  and  prop- 
erty, the  preservation  of  public  health,  the  relief  of  the 
poor,  the  provision  of  public  education,  the  care  of  the 
highways,  the  construction  of  public  works,  and  the  ad- 
ministration of  local  taxation  seem  equally  clearly  mat- 
ters in  which  the  people  of  the  county  have  an  interest, 
equal  if  not  paramount  to  those  of  the  state  as  a  whole. 
These  latter  functions  may  be  regarded,  therefore,  as 
the  local  functions  of  the  county,  however  they  may  be 
controlled  or  by  whom  exercised.  And  yet  these  too 
are  still  generally  viewed  as  state  functions. 

Some  conception  of  the  extent  of  these  various  func- 
tions performed  by  American  counties  may  be  obtained 
from  the  United  States  Census  returns  on  county  reve- 
nues and  expenditures  in  19 13,  the  last  year  for  which 
complete  statistics  are  available.  In  that  year  the  total 
governmental  cost  payments  of  counties,  which  in- 
clude expenses,  interest,  and  outlays,  amounted  to 
$385,181,760,  or  $4.49  per  capita.  The  statistics  show 
enormous  variations  both  in  the  total  governmental  cost 
payments  by  counties  grouped  by  states  and  in  the  per 
capita  figures  on  the  same  basis.  The  total  payments 
varied  from  $45,000  for  Vermont  to  $46,000,000  for  Cal- 
ifornia, while  the  per  capita  payments  varied  from  13 
cents  in  the  former  state  to  $20.67  in  the  latter.  Rhode 
Island  was  the  only  state  in  which  there  were  no  county 
payments  whatever,  as  in  that  state  alone  the  county  is 


196  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

not  recognized  as  an  independent  fiscal  unit,  the  county 
expenses  being  included  in  the  state  budget. 

Viewed  as  geographical  groups  it  is  seen  that  the  Paci- 
fic states,  California,  Oregon,  and  Washington  rank  first 
in  per  capita  expenditure  with  $15.45,  the  Mountain 
states  second  with  $9.47,  and  the  New  England  states 
last  with  $1.06.  The  Southern  states  show  a  per  capita 
average  expenditure  of  $3.69  while  the  only  group  of 
states  other  than  the  two  first  mentioned,  which  exceed 
the  per  capita  for  the  country  as  a  whole,  are  the  seven 
states  of  the  West  North  Central  group  7  with  a  per  capita 
expenditure  of  of  $5.19. 

These  figures  are  affected  by  two  varying  factors  which 
must  be  kept  in  mind  in  instituting  comparisons  as  to 
county  government  based  on  statistics  of  governmental 
cost  payments.  One  factor  is  the  extent  of  functions 
performed  in  certain  of  the  states  by  the  subdivisions  of 
the  county  such  as  townships,  towns,  school  districts,  road 
districts,  and  other  minor  units.  The  other  is  the  extent 
to  which  the  county  enters  upon  the  functions  which  are 
by  law  intrusted  to  it.  It  will  be  necessary  to  revert  to 
this  two-fold  phase  of  the  matter  in  considering  the  sta- 
tistics of  expenditures  under  the  different  classes  of 
functions.  The  largest  per  capita  for  a  single  county  in 
19 1 3  was  $53.75  in  St.  Lucie  County  in  Florida,  with 
Glenn  County,  California,  second  with  a  per  capita  of 
$51.04. 

Of  the  total  governmental  cost  payments  by  Ameri- 
can counties  in  19 13  more  than  J2  per  cent  was  applied 
to  the  expenses  of  the  general  departments,  4V2  Per 
cent  was  paid  out  in  interest  on  indebtedness  and  over 
23  per  cent  was  spent  for  permanent  improvements. 

7  Minnesota,  Iowa,  Missouri,  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  Ne- 
braska, and  Kansas. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     197 

The  revenue  receipts  for  the  same  year  amounted  to 
$370,043,946,  the  per  capita  being  $4.32  and  the  rela- 
tive position  of  the  states  and  group  of  states  being  very 
largely  the  same  when  considered  from  this  point  of 
view  as  in  the  case  of  governmental  cost  payments  con- 
sidered above. 

In  addition  to  the  governmental  cost  payments  men- 
tioned above,  the  counties  in  191 3  paid  out  $58,965,207 
for  the  redemption  of  debt  obligations,  and  the  receipts 
from  the  issue  of  debt  obligations  for  the  same  year 
amounted  to  $86,051,348. 

Functions  of  State  Administration 

Judicial  Administration. —  The  American  county  is 
above  all  a  district  for  the  administration  of  justice. 
Leaving  out  of  consideration  the  justice  courts,  which 
ordinarily  have  a  jurisdiction  coextensive  with  the  county 
in  which  they  are  located,  there  are  in  a  large  number  of 
states,  as  has  been  seen,  special  courts  for  each  county 
and  in  those  states  in  which  there  is  no  regular  system  of 
county  courts,  the  district,  circuit,  or  superior  courts  reg- 
ularly hold  sessions  in  each  county.  These  courts  are 
usually  courts  of  record  and  courts  of  general  civil  and 
criminal  jurisdiction,  though  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
county  courts  proper  is  usually  limited  where  there  are 
higher  courts  provided  between  them  and  the  supreme 
court  of  the  state.  The  officers  of  these  courts,  as  has 
been  seen,  are  generally  county  officers,  in  that  they  are 
elected  by  or  appointed  for  the  county,  though  the  pre- 
siding judges  and  prosecuting  attorneys  are  sometimes 
chosen  from  a  larger  district. 

In  criminal  cases  tried  in  the  courts  in  the  county  al- 
most every  stage  of  the  proceedings  is  identified  with 
the  county.     The  arrest  of  the  offender  is  the  business 


198  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  sheriff  or  his  deputies,  though  local  police  offic- 
ials in  the  cities,  and  marshals  or  constables  in  the  small 
towns  and  rural  districts  may  arrest,  and  justices  of  the 
peace  and  judges  of  the  police  courts  may  issue  warrants 
for  arrest  and  commit  for  trial  by  the  higher  court  for  of- 
fenses not  triable  in  the  lowest  courts.  If  the  accused  does 
not  give  bail  to  appear,  he  is  imprisoned  in  the  county  jail. 
If  an  indictment  is  required,  the  sheriff  usually  summons 
the  grand  jury,  consisting  of  not  more  than  twenty-four 
inhabitants  of  the  county,  the  judge  of  the  trial  court 
charges  the  jury  with  the  business  before  it,  and  the  pros- 
ecuting attorney  for  the  county  presents  the  case.  If  an 
information  is  brought,  it  is  the  prosecuting  attorney  for 
the  county  who  draws  that  up.  When  the  case  comes  to 
trial,  the  trial  or  petty  jury  is  selected  from  inhabitants 
of  the  county  in  which  the  offense  was  committed,  and 
when  a  verdict  of  guilty  is  returned,  and  the  judgment 
imposes  a  sentence  of  imprisonment,  the  prisoner  is  sen- 
tenced to  the  county  jail,  except  for  the  more  serious 
offenses,  when  he  is  usually  imprisoned  in  the  state  pen- 
itentiary. The  expenses  of  the  proceeding  are  borne 
by  the  county,  including  the  salaries  of  the  court  officers, 
and  the  maintenance  of  courthouses  and  jails,  and  when 
fines  are  imposed  they  ordinarily  inure  to  the  benefit  of 
the  county.  It  appears,  therefore,  in  many  respects  to 
be  a  county  proceeding. 

But  as  has  already  been  pointed  out,  the  of- 
fenses which  are  tried  in  the  courts  held  in  the  counties  are 
offenses  against  the  laws  of  the  state,  not  against  local 
laws,  and  all  the  proceedings  are  regulated  by  state 
law  and  are  subject  to  review  by  the  higher  courts  of 
the  state  in  the  interests  of  the  accused.  It  is  only  in 
the  direction  of  protecting  the  offender  that  the  county 
plays  a  determining  part.     If  the  sheriff  fails  to  arrest, 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     199 

if  the  prosecuting  officer  fails  to  present  evidence  for  an 
indictment  or  to  institute  proceedings  on  information,  if 
the  grand  jury  fails  to  return  a  true  bill,  if  the  prose- 
cuting attorney  fails  to  conduct  the  case  effectively,  if 
the  judge  directs  a  verdict  of  not  guilty,  if  the  petty 
jury  fails  to  render  a  unanimous  verdict  of  guilty,  or  if 
the  judge  imposes  too  light  a  sentence,  the  state  law  may 
virtually  be  nullified.  As  has  been  seen,  local  or  politi- 
cal considerations  can  creep  in  at  almost  every  stage  of 
the  proceedings  to  defeat  the  proper  administration  of 
the  criminal  law  as  instituted  by  the  state  for  its  own 
preservation.  If,  however,  all  of  these  local  agencies 
function  separately  and  in  combination  to  the  extent  of 
arresting,  convicting,  and  sentencing  an  offender,  the  ap- 
pellate courts  of  the  state  may  still  set  it  all  aside  on  a 
multitude  of  technical  grounds.  Should  the  action  of  the 
local  courts  be  sustained  by  the  higher  courts,  there  is 
still  the  possibility  of  it  all  being  brought  to  naught  by 
the  exercise  of  the  pardoning  power  on  the  part  of  the 
executive  branch  of  the  state  government.  In  a  positive 
sense,  therefore,  the  interest  of  the  county  in  the  preser- 
vation of  law  and  order  within  its  confines  is  protected 
by  a  partial  and  incomplete  power,  while  in  a  negative 
way  the  action  of  the  various  county  factors  involved  in 
the  administration  of  criminal  law  may  be  final  in  the 
failure  to  enforce  the  laws  in  which  the  state  has  a  para- 
mount interest. 

In  the  conduct  of  civil  cases  also,  local  factors  play  a 
part,  though  to  a  much  more  limited  extent  than  in  the 
case  of  criminal  cases.  The  institution  of  the  suit  is  left 
to  private  individuals,  the  attorneys  for  both  parties  may 
be  residents  of  other  counties,  and  the  costs,  aside  from 
the  regular  expense  of  the  judicial  machinery,  are  not 
borne  by  the  public.     The  jury,  however,  when  employed, 


200  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

is  locally  summoned  and  consists  of  inhabitants  of  the 
county,  the  judge  and  court  officers  are  county  officers, 
and  the  judgment  is  enforced  by  county  officials.  But 
there  is  ordinarily  no  conflict  of  interests  as  between  the 
county  and  the  state  at  large  in  the  determination  of  the 
suit.  This  phase  of  judicial  administration  is  not,  there- 
fore, one  in  which  the  county  as  such  has  any  peculiar 
interest. 

Probate  administration  or  the  settlement  of  estates  of 
decedents  is  a  branch  of  judicial  administration  which  has 
very  generally  been  centered  in  the  county  as  a  jurisdic- 
tional unit,  entrusted  either  to  the  regular  county  courts  or 
to  special  probate  courts  under  varying  names.  In  some 
states,  notably  in  New  England,  probate  administration 
is  exercised  in  districts  smaller  than  the  county,  while  in 
others  several  counties  may  be  united  into  probate  dis- 
tricts, but  in  any  case  it  is  evident  that  the  county  as  such 
has  no  special  interests  involved,  as  the  laws  with  regard 
to  the  administration  of  estates  are  state-wide  laws  and 
the  action  of  the  probate  court  affects  all  the  property  of 
the  decedent,  both  personal  and  real,  wherever  situated 
within  the  state,  and  as  regards  his  personal  property 
wherever  it  may  be,  even  outside  the  state.  There  is, 
therefore,  no  reason  for  the  local  selection  of  the  officers 
of  the  probate  court,  nor  for  their  salaries  being  made  a 
charge  upon  the  county. 

The  County  Jail. —  Perhaps  no  phase  of  county  ad- 
ministration is  as  uniformly  unsatisfactory  or  as  gener- 
ally criticized  as  is  that  of  the  county  jail,  an  important 
instrument  in  the  administration  of  the  criminal  law. 
Jails  must  be  provided  by  counties  by  statutory  provision 
in  practically  all  the  states,  and  in  the  great  majority  of 
them  the  sheriff  is  the  responsible  officer.  We  have  al- 
ready discussed  the  manner  of  selection  and  the  term  of 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     201 

office  of  the  sheriff,  and  no  argument  is  needed  to  show 
that  he  is  neither  by  training  nor  inclination  a  penologist. 
His  income  is  frequently  affected  by  the  number  of  pris- 
oners in  the  jail  as  he  is  usually  allowed  a  certain  sum 
for  the  feeding  of  each  prisoner.  The  difference  be- 
tween the  sum  allowed  him  and  the  amount  he  spends 
on  the  prisoners  goes  into  his  own  pocket,  with  conse- 
quences that  can  easily  be  imagined.8 

Wherever  investigations  of  county  jails  have  been 
made  they  have  been  found  to  be,  almost  uniformly,  bad. 
The  quarters  are  crowded,  uncomfortable,  dirty,  and  fre- 
quently indecent.  There  is  seldom  any  provision  for  ex- 
ercise or  opportunity  for  employment.  Men  and  wo- 
men, old  and  young,  sick  and  insane,  confirmed  criminals, 
first  offenders,  and  even  those  merely  under  arrest  await- 
ing action  by  the  grand  jury  are  frequently  herded  in 
together.9  Though  the  laws  may  prescribe  decent  con- 
ditions in  many  of  these  respects,  indifference,  lack  of 
funds,  or  political  considerations  generally  operate  to  nul- 
lify such  provisions  when  they  exist,  and  one  of  the  most 
eminent  authorities  on  prison  reform  declares  that  in  his 
opinion  these  abuses  are  inseparable  from  the  system  of 
county  jails.10  Direct  state  administration  of  this  ele- 
ment in  the  administration  of  criminal  justice  would  seem 
to  be  dictated  by  experience  as  well  as  by  theory. 

County  Functions  in  State  Elections. — Another  very 
general  activity  of  the  county  in  which  it  acts  as  the  di- 
rect agent  of  the  state  is  that  in  connection  with  the  con- 
duct of  state  elections.     In  Virginia,  as  has  been  seen,  one 


8  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  p.  90. 

9  Fairlie,  "  County  and  Town  Government  in  Illinois,"  Annals 
of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  p.  70. 
Also  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  pp.  90-91. 

10  O.  F.  Lewis,  "  County  Prisons,"  Proceedings  of  the  Third  Con- 
ference for  the  Study  and  Reform  of  County  Government,  pp.  1-11. 


202  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  earliest  attributes  of  the  county  was  its  character 
as  an  election  district  for  members  of  the  colonial  as- 
sembly, and  in  all  of  the  states  except  the  New  England 
group  this  feature  of  county  government  was  continued. 
But  in  addition  to  constituting  an  election  district  for 
state  senators  and  representatives,  either  by  itself  or  to- 
gether with  other  counties,  and  also  being  grouped  with 
other  counties  in  congressional  districts,  the  county  has 
almost  universally  been  made  the  district  for  the  admin- 
istration of  the  nominating  and  electing  procedure  in 
connection  with  the  election  of  state  officers.  The  prep- 
aration of  polling  places,  the  provisions  of  judges  and 
other  poll  officials,  and  the  canvassing  of  the  returns  and 
their  certification  to  the  state  authorities  is  almost  every- 
where entrusted  to  the  county  authorities. 

Corresponding  to  its  importance  as  a  general  election 
unit,  combined  with  the  large  number  of  officers  elected 
by  and  for  the  county,  is  the  place  of  the  county  in  the 
organization  of  the  political  parties.  In  almost  all  of 
the  states  with  the  exception  of  New  England,  the  county 
convention  and  the  county  committee  constitute  the  most 
important  cogs  in  the  state  political  party  machine. 
Whether  state  officers  are  nominated  by  state  conventions, 
the  members  of  which  are  selected  by  the  county  conven- 
tions, or  whether  one  of  the  various  forms  of  nomination 
by  primary  elections  is  employed,  the  county  party  organ- 
ization plays  a  fundamental  role.  In  its  activities  it  pre- 
sents a  two- fold  aspect,  however.  Not  merely  does  it 
function  as  an  integral  part  of  the  machinery  for  state 
campaigns,  but  incidentally  it  controls  also  the  filling  of 
the  strictly  county  offices,  since  those  positions  and  the 
contracts  and  jobs  they  control,  as  well  as  the  important 
relation  between  the  judicial  and  police  officials  in  the 
county  and  the  activities  of  the  politicians  which  was 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     203 

touched  upon  in  the  preceding  chapter,  furnish  important 
weapons  of  offense  and  defense  in  the  conduct  of  politics.11 

The  importance  of  the  county  as  a  cog  in  the  politi- 
cal party  machinery  can  hardly  be  overemphasized  in 
any  study  of  the  county  which  attempts  not  merely  to 
point  out  weaknesses  in  the  system  but  also  to  examine 
the  causes  of  its  inefficiency  and  the  reasons  why  reme- 
dies have  not  been  applied  more  generally.  The  corrup- 
tion of  politics  in  the  large  cities  of  the  country  has  been 
exposed  again  and  again  and  more  or  less  successful  as- 
saults upon  the  factors  which  make  such  conditions  pos- 
sible, have,  as  will  be  seen,  been  made.  But  little  pro- 
gress has  been  made  in  the  direction  even  of  publicity  on 
similar  conditions  prevailing  in  our  counties.  Yet  the 
most  notorious  political  organization  in  the  United  States 
which  has  played  an  important,  if  not  honorable,  role  in 
the  entire  field  of  party  politics,  local,  state,  and  national, 
is  Tammany  Hall,  which  is  the  Democratic  party  machine 
of  New  York  County.  Reproductions  in  miniature  of 
this  county  organization  are  to  be  found  throughout  the 
length  and  breadth  of  the  land,  but  the  stakes  being 
smaller  and  the  public  interest  much  less  aroused,  they 
have  been  permitted  to  carry  on  their  work  with  but 
little  effective  criticism.  Until  the  same  sort  of  atten- 
tion is  directed  to  this  phase  of  the  county  problem  that 
has  been  more  and  more  concentrated  upon  municipal  and 
state  politics,  the  ground  will  not  even  have  been  cleared 
for  the  inauguration  of  constructive  measures  of  im- 
provement. 

Assessment  and  Collection  of  State  Taxes. —  A 
third  function  which  the  county  generally  performs  for 
the  state  is  the  valuation  of  property  for  taxation.  The 
general  property  tax  is  by  far  the  most  important  source 

11  See,  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  Chap.  vi. 


204  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  state  revenues,  and  the  listing  of  this  property  and 
placing  upon  it  a  value  for  purposes  of  taxation  is  in  th£ 
great  majority  of  states  entrusted  very  largely  to  county 
officials.  Until  recently  this  function  was  performed  for 
the  state  largely  without  any  adequate  state  supervision, 
with  the  unfortunate  results  noted  in  the  previous  chap- 
ter. If  the  county  is  to  be  the  unit  for  the  assessment  of 
property  for  purposes  of  state  taxation  it  must  be  sub- 
jected to  strict  control  in  the  interests  of  efficiency  and 
impartiality  and  the  state  should  bear  its  proportionate 
share  of  the  expense  of  such  assessment,  for  scientific 
assessment  of  property  requires  the  expenditure  of  suffi- 
cient funds  to  provide  expert  assessors  and  the  instru- 
ments with  which  they  must  work. 

The  taxes  collected  for  the  state  by  the  county  are 
turned  over  to  the  state  treasury  at  regular  intervals  by 
the  county  officials,  and  in  this  respect  also,  of  course,  the 
state  must  possess  the  means  of  careful  control  and  com- 
pulsion. This  is  obviously  an  activity  in  which  the  in- 
habitants of  the  county  as  such  have  no  immediate  in- 
terest and  in  which  the  service  to  the  state  should  be  paid 
for  by  it  and  not  by  the  county. 

Military  Administration. —  In  some  of  the  colonies, 
notably  Virginia,  one  of  the  earliest  functions  of  the 
county  was  to  act  as  the  principal  unit  for  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  militia,  each  shire  being  under  the  direction  of 
a  lieutenant  as  commander,  corresponding  very  closely 
to  the  Lord  Lieutenant  in  England.  Even  in  New  Eng- 
land, where  the  town  appeared  as  the  primary  militia 
unit,  the  county  became  the  regimental  unit  at  an  early 
date.  Throughout  the  colonial  period  this  aspect  of  the 
county  constituted  one  of  its  most  important  activities. 
The  election  of  the  sergeant  major,  the  actual  command- 
ing officer  of  the  regiment,  by  the  freemen  of  the  shire 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     205 

in  Massachusetts  as  early  as  1643  presented  probably 
the  first  instance  of  an  officer  of  the  county  elected  by 
popular  vote.  The  relative  importance  of  the  county  as 
a  militia  unit  declined,  of  course,  with  the  establishment 
of  a  Federal  army,  and  by  later  legislation  other  divisions 
than  the  county,  such  for  instance  as  the  congressional 
districts  in  Mississippi,  came  to  be  used  as  the  unit.  In 
fact,  counties  came  to  be  less  and  less  suitable  for  this 
purpose.  But  in  a  considerable  number  of  states  to-day 
the  county  is  still  the  recognized  unit  for  the  organization 
of  the  state  militia. 

This  function  is  obviously  a  state,  not  a  local,  function 
for  while  the  militia  may  be  called  out  to  preserve  order 
in  the  county  on  request  of  the  sheriff,  or  by  action  of  the 
governor  without  such  request,  it  is  not  available  except 
in  emergencies  and  even  then  it  has  not  in  general  shown 
itself  to  be  a  very  satisfactory  instrument  for  dealing 
with  serious  disorders.  It  can  hardly  be  viewed,  there- 
fore, in  the  light  of  a  branch  of  the  local  police  force, 
for  which  function  it  is  entirely  too  cumbersome.12 

The  Recording  of  Deeds  and  Other  Instruments.— 
The  county,  as  has  been  seen,  was  at  an  early  date  in  the 
history  of  colonial  administration  designated  as  a  con- 
venient unit  for  the  recording  of  deeds.  But  this  is  a 
function  performed  for  the  state  as  a  whole  and  under 
requirements  minutely  prescribed  by  state  law.  Under 
the  Torrens  system  adopted  in  a  number  of  our  states,  the 
act  of  recording  deeds  in  the  prescribed  manner  actually 
establishes  a  title  instead  of  merely  presumptive  evidence 
of  title  which  simplifies  the  determination  of  ownership 
of  land.  So  far  as  the  expense  of  the  system  of  regis- 
tration of  land  titles  and  other  documents  required  by 
law  to  be  recorded  is  not  paid  by  the  owners  of  the  land 

12  See  Holcombe,  State  Government  in  the  United  States,  p.  288. 


206  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

or  instruments,  it  is  properly  a  charge  upon  the  state 
treasury  and  not  upon  the  county. 

It  is  not  possible  to  discover  from  the  Census  statistics 
of  governmental  cost  payments  of  counties  just  what 
amounts  were  spent  in  the  year  19 13  for  each  of  the 
activities  considered  above  under  the  head  of  activities 
of  state  administration.  Nor  is  it  possible  to  derive  the 
total  expenses  falling  under  that  general  head,  as  the 
classification  of  the  Census  reports  does  not  correspond 
completely  with  that  adopted  here.  But  adopting  the 
figures  given  in  the  Census  reports  under  the  headings  of 
"  General  Government "  and  "  Protection  to  Persons  and 
Property  "  as  comprising  roughly  the  functions  consid- 
ered here  under  the  designation  of  functions  of  state 
administration,  it  appears  that  of  the  $277,735,319  rep- 
resenting the  total  of  expenses  of  general  departments, 
$117,548,193,  or  a  little  over  42  per  cent,  were  spent  for 
these  general  state  purposes.  This  does  not  include, 
however,  the  outlays  or  payments  for  land  or  other  prop- 
erty and  public  improvements,  more  or  less  permanent 
in  character,  in  connection  with  these  functions,  nor  the 
proportion  of  interest  charges  properly  assigned  to  them, 
as  only  the  total  outlays  and  interest  payments  are  given 
in  the  Census  figures.  It  is  possible,  however,  by  com- 
paring the  value  of  public  properties  reported  in  the  same 
year  under  the  heads  of  courthouses  and  jails  with  the 
total  value  of  lands,  buildings,  and  equipment  of  general 
departments,  to  obtain  an  approximation  of  the  relative 
amount  expended  in  interest  and  outlays  for  these  func- 
tions of  state  administration.  Of  the  total  value  of 
lands,  buildings,  and  equipment  of  counties  reported  for 
that  year,  namely,  $576,656,715,  the  value  of  the  lands, 
buildings,    and    equipment    of    courthouses    and    jails 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     207 

amounted  to  $349,717,387,  or  a  little  more  than  60.5  per 
cent.  Adopting  this  ratio  as  a  rough  basis  for  estimat- 
ing the  proportion  of  the  $89,839,  725  reported  as  total 
outlays  for  the  year  191 3,  the  outlays  for  jails  and  court 
houses  would  equal  about  $54,488,868,  and  the  yearly  in- 
terest charges  for  indebtedness  incurred  for  these  pur- 
poses would  amount  to  60.5  per  cent  of  $I7>4T7>593  or 
$10,381,152. 

The  total  expenditures,  then,  in  one  year,  for  the  func- 
tions of  state  government  performed  by  counties  would 
appear  to  approximate  the  considerable  total  of  nearly 
$182,500,000.  As  this  money  comes  chiefly  out  of  the 
pockets  of  the  county  taxpayers,  as  will  appear  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  county  finances,  it  is  apparent  that  the  county 
is  heavily  burdened  in  the  performance  of  functions  in 
which  it  has  no  peculiar  interest  and  from  which  it  derives 
no  special  benefit.  The  general  inefficiency  of  county  ad- 
ministration and  the  lack  of  adequate  control  from  the 
point  of  view  of  honesty,  capability,  and  economy,  make 
it  certain  that  the  expenditures  for  these  purposes  under 
the  system  of  county  control  are  greater  than  they  would 
be  for  the  same  purposes  if  directed  and  controlled  by 
an  efficient  centralized  administration. 

Functions  of  Local  Administration 

As  distinguished  from  the  foregoing  functions  per- 
formed by  the  county  which  are  primarily  activities  of 
state  administration,  there  remain  those  functions  in 
which  the  inhabitants  of  the  county  have  a  relatively 
greater  direct  interest  and  which,  therefore,  may  be 
termed  local  functions  by  contrast,  even  though  they  are 
of  greater  or  less  concern  to  the  state  as  a  whole,  for  it 
has  already  been  seen  that  no  conceivable  activity  of  local 
government  could  be  quite  without  interest  to  the  people 


208  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  state  as  a  whole.  These  more  strictly  local  func- 
tions will  be  classified  for  the  sake  of  convenience  under 
the  heads  employed  by  the  Census  reports  for  financial 
statistics  as  follows:  Education;  Highways;  Charities, 
Hospitals,  and  Corrections;  Conservation  of  Health  and 
Sanitation ;  Recreation ;  Expenses  of  Public-Service  En- 
terprises ;  and  Miscellaneous  Departments. 

The  total  governmental  expenses  in  the  year  19 13  for 
these  local  activities  amounted  to  more  than  $160,000,000. 
or  nearly  58  per  cent  of  the  total  governmental  expenses. 
This  assumes  that  the  sum  of  $5,574,800  assigned  to  the 
heading  of  Miscellaneous  and  General  Expenses  was 
chiefly  expended  for  these  local  functions  rather  than  for 
the  state  functions  considered  in  the  preceding  section. 
This  assumption,  however,  can  neither  be  proved  nor 
disproved  because  this  heading  in  the  Census  reports  com- 
prises returns  that  could  not  be  classified  under  the  other 
heads  and  to  a  certain  extent  at  least  includes  items  that 
should  properly  have  been  included  under  one  of  the  two 
main  heads  grouped  herein  under  state  functions.  But 
as  the  sum  involved  represents  less  than  four  per  cent  of 
the  totals  as  herein  given  for  expenses  of  local  county 
functions,  the  margin  of  error  is  sufficiently  small  to  be 
ignored  for  the  purposes  of  general  comparison  had  in 
mind  in  this  presentation. 

Adopting  the  same  basis  for  estimating  the  proportion 
of  government  cost  payments  in  the  year  191 3  that  went 
into  interest  and  outlays  for  the  local  functions  of  county 
government,  which  was  used  in  totaling  the  cost  of  the 
state  functions,  it  would  seem  that  the  sum  of  $42,323>7°3 
was  spent  under  these  items,  making  a  total  expenditure 
for  local  purposes  of  about  $202,700,000  as  compared 
with  a  total  expenditure  of  about  $182,500,000  for  state 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     209 

purposes.  In  other  words,  of  the  total  governmental  cost 
payments  made  by  counties  in  the  year  19 13  only  about 
53  per  cent  was  spent  for  purposes  in  which  the  people 
of  the  county  may  be  considered  as  having  a  special  in- 
terest. Of  the  total  buildings,  lands,  and  equipment  be- 
longing to  counties  and  paid  for  by  them,  amounting  to 
some  $577,656,785  in  191 3,  less  than  40  per  cent  in  value 
were  devoted  to  these  local  purposes. 

Education. —  Measured  by  the  total  expenditures  by 
counties,  the  most  important  county  function  included 
under  the  head  of  these  local  functions  we  are  now  con- 
sidering is  education.  In  the  year  19 13  the  total  county 
expenses  of  school  administration  were  reported  at 
$57,682,193  making  a  per  capita  expenditure  for  this  pur- 
pose of  $0.67.  But  these  figures  are  likely  to  be  mis- 
leading because  of  the  enormous  variations  in  the  county 
expenses  for  schools  in  the  different  sections  of  the  coun- 
try, in  the  various  states  within  a  given  section,  and  even 
in  the  different  counties  of  a  single  state.  In  the  first 
place  it  is  to  be  noted  that  in  none  of  the  six  New  Eng- 
land states  is  there  any  county  expenditure  whatever  for 
school  purposes,  the  local  contributions  to  public  educa- 
tion being  made  by  the  towns  or  districts  within  the  towns. 
Viewed  by  groups  of  states  the  per  capita  county  expenses 
for  schools  varied  from  $0.02  in  the  Middle  Atlantic 
group  to  $5.26  in  the  Pacific  group,  while  the  variations 
among  individual  states  ranged  from  $0.01  per  capita 
in  New  Jersey,  Virginia,  and  Texas,  to  $8.07  in  Cali- 
fornia. West  Virginia  and  Delaware,  like  the  New  Eng- 
land states,  showed  no  county  expenditures  for  school 
purposes. 

To  the  expenses  of  school  administration  must  be  added 
a  portion  of  the  interest  payments  and  of  the  outlays  for 


210  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

buildings,  lands,  and  equipment  for  schools.  The  Census 
statistics  do  not  itemize  these  returns  for  the  various 
departments  but  some  conception  of  the  proportion  of  in- 
terest and  outlays  chargeable  to  schools  may  be  gained 
from  the  fact  that  the  value  of  the  lands,  buildings,  and 
equipment  of  county  schools  and  libraries  13  reported  in 
1913  was  $96,568,847  out  of  a  total  value  of  county  pub- 
lic properties  of  $576,656,715.  But  less  than  a  third  of 
the  states  reported  any  county  property  under  the  head 
of  schools  and  libraries  and  these  were  with  two  excep- 
tions all  in  the  Southern,  Mountain,  and  Pacific  states. 
California  alone  reported  over  half  of  the  total  values  of 
properties  under  this  head. 

The  expenses  of  school  administration  figured  as  an 
important  part  of  the  total  governmental  cost  payments 
of  counties  only  in  the  Southern  and  Western  states,  and 
in  those  states  the  school  expenses  were  wholly  lacking  in 
West  Virginia,  were  negligible  in  Virginia  and  Texas, 
and  almost  so  in  Arkansas.  In  the  other  states  of  these 
sections,  however,  this  function  of  county  government 
assumes  a  relatively  important  role. 

Of  course  the  amount  expended  by  counties  for  schools 
is  not  a  criterion  of  the  efficiency  of  local  rural  school  ad- 
ministration, for  in  the  Southern  states,  where  this  item 
figures  prominently,  the  rural  school  situation  is  by  no 
means  the  most  satisfactory.  These  figures  may  indicate 
merely  that  the  county  plays  a  relatively  more  important 
part  in  the  school  system  than  in  the  Northern  and  East- 
ern states  where  the  townships  and  school  districts  are  the 
primary  units  of  school  administration.  But  the  trend  of 
expert  opinion  seems  to  be  distinctly  in  the  direction  of 
favoring  the  substitution  of  unified  county  administration 

13  The  value  of  libraries  though  not  segregated  is  small.  See  be- 
low, p.  214. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     211 

of  schools  for  the  complex  and  unsatisfactory  district  sys- 
tem now  general  in  the  Northern  and  Eastern  states.14 
Public-school  administration  began  in  this  country  in 
colonial  times  as  a  wholly  local  undertaking.  As  early  as 
1647  ^e  Massachusetts  towns  were  required  by  law 
to  establish  elementary  schools,  and  the  New  England 
towns  or  districts  within  the  towns  became  the  general 
units  of  school  administration.  In  the  central  states  and 
those  adopting  the  county-township  system  of  local  gov- 
ernment the  primary  units  of  school  administration  cor- 
responded in  general  to  the  townships  or  subdivisions  of 
the  townships.  In  fact,  as  has  been  seen,  the  Federal 
Government  in  setting  aside  lands  for  public  school  pur- 
poses in  the  territories  and  in  insisting  on  a  similar  pro- 
vision by  the  states  upon  applying  for  admission  to  state- 
hood, designated  a  section  or  sections  of  land  to  be  dedi- 
cated to  public-school  purposes,  sometimes  stating  ex- 
pressly that  it  should  be  for  the  benefit  of  the  people 
of  the  township.  In  the  Southern  states,  on  the  other 
hand,  where  provision  for  free  public  schools  came  much 
later  than  in  the  Northern  states,  the  county  was  the  only 
suitable  existing  unit  for  school  administration.  Owing 
to  the  sparseness  of  population,  however,  and  the  large 
area  of  counties,  special  districts  were  created  within  the 
counties  for  school  purposes,  and  incorporated  towns  and 
cities  were  commonly  constituted  special  districts,  usually 
exempt  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  county  authorities. 
With  the  increased  density  of  population  and  improved 
transit  facilities,  however,  the  county  appears  to  be  com- 
ing into  more  and  more  favor  as  the  primary  educational 
unit,  elementary  schools  being  established  at  convenient 
places   and    secondary    schools    being   provided    for    the 

14  See  Cubberley  and  Elliott,  State  and  County  School  Adminis- 
tration (New  York,  1915),  Vol.  II,  Chap.  ix. 


212  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

county  as  a  whole.  In  some  instances  the  entire  school 
administration  is  in  the  hands  of  county  authorities,  in- 
cluding even  the  direction  of  the  educational  system  in 
cities  within  the  county.15 

While  some  progress  is  being  made  in  the  direction  of 
centralizing  local  school  administration  in  larger  districts 
than  the  towns,  townships,  or  rural  districts,  there  has 
also  been  a  steady  and  marked  trend  toward  control  over 
local  school  administration  by  state  authorities.  Early 
in  the  nineteenth  century  states  began  to  establish  central 
educational  authorities,  and  at  the  time  of  the  Civil  War 
all  the  Northern  states  had  provided  central  educational 
authorities  of  various  kinds  and  with  varying  powers. 
The  movement  spread  after  the  Civil  War  and  now  com- 
prises all  the  states  of  the  Union. 

In  the  method  of  their  constitution,  in  their  general 
powers,  and  in  their  relation  to  the  local  school  authorities, 
these  different  state  authorities  show  the  greatest  varia- 
tions. But  a  few  characteristics  of  various  types  may  be 
noted,  especially  with  regard  to  their  relation  to  the  local 
authorities.16  State  Superintendents  of  Public  Instruc- 
tion, under  this  or  a  similar  title,  exist  in  every  state  in 
the  Union.  In  thirty-three  states  the  superintendent  is 
popularly  elected,  by  a  constitutional  requirement  in  most 
of  the  states ;  in  nine  states  he  is  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor ;  in  six  states  he  is  appointed  by  a  state  board ;  and 
in  one  case,  Vermont,  he  is  chosen  by  the  legislature. 
Forty  states  have  also  a  State  Board  of  Education.  This 
board  in  a  number  of  cases  consists  wholly  or  largely  of 

15  See  Cubberly  and  Elliott,  ibid.,  II,  pp.  246-249. 

16  See  Cubberly  and  Elliott,  ibid.,  Vol.  II,  Chap,  xi;  Young,  The 
New  American  Government  and  Its  Work  (New  York,  1916),  pp. 
400,  401 ;  Fairlie,  Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns,  and  Vil- 
lages, Chap,  xii ;  Holcombe,  State  Government  in  the  United  States 
(New  York,  1916),  pp.  289-292. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     213 

ex  officio  members,  in  other  cases  it  is  a  specially  consti- 
tuted authority  filled  by  appointment  of  the  governor,  or 
by  the  legislature,  or  even  by  popular  election,  with  the 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction  as  a  member. 

The  relative  powers  and  duties  of  the  salaried  execu- 
tive officers  and  the  unsalaried  boards  vary  greatly  from 
state  to  state  and  it  is  not  possible  to  discuss  those  varia- 
tions here.  But  the  powers  of  the  state  authorities,  how- 
ever distributed,  in  their  relation  to  the  county  authorities 
may  be  briefly  noted.  In  a  few  states  the  central  author- 
ities are  still  very  limited  in  the  measure  of  control  they 
exercise  over  the  local  authorities,  but  in  most  states  they 
exercise  control  in  one  or  more  of  the  following  ways : 

1.  General  supervision  over  public  schools. 

2.  The  distribution  of  state  school  funds  to  the  locali- 

ties. 

3.  The  examination  and  certification  of  teachers. 

4.  The  complete  or  partial  determination  of  the  cur- 

riculum. 

5.  The    prescribing    of    textbooks    for    the    different 

subjects. 
The  power  of  the  central  authorities  to  insist  on  min- 
imum requirements  in  the  public  schools  of  the  localities 
affects  the  rural  school  system  much  more  vitally  than 
the  city  schools,  the  latter  usually  adopting  by  local  action 
standards  higher  than  those  set  by  the  state.  One  of  the 
most  significant  of  the  instruments  wielded  to  this  end 
by  the  state  authorities  is  the  power  to  make  the  allowance 
of  state  grants  to  local  schools  dependent  upon  the  meet- 
ing of  certain  requirements  as  to  length  of  the  term,  the 
equipment,  and  teaching  force  of  the  local  schools.  This 
is  an  adaptation  of  the  English  grant-in-aid  system, 
which,  as  has  been  seen,  plays  an  important  role  in  central 
control  over  local  administration  in  England.     It  com- 


214  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

bines  the  advantages  of  central  supervision  and  control 
in  the  interest  of  minimum  standards  and  uniformity 
with  the  absence  of  local  resentment  at  state  interference. 
Most  of  the  states  use  this  method  to  a  greater  or  less 
extent  and  in  some  cases  the  state  aid  amounts  to  as 
much  as  a  third  of  the  whole  local  expense.  By  granting 
relatively  larger  amounts  to  the  poorer  rural  areas  the 
state  can  make  possible  an  adequate  school  system 
throughout  its  entire  area  while  at  the  same  time  stimu- 
lating local  interest  and  endeavor. 

County  school  administration,  therefore,  presents  a 
clear  example  of  a  function  in  which  the  inhabitants  of 
the  local  government  area  have  a  primary  interest,  but 
in  which  the  interests  of  the  state  as  a  whole  in  the  im- 
provement of  educational  opportunities  for  all  its  citi- 
zens can  be  preserved  by  means  of  financial  assistance  cor- 
responding to  its  larger  interest  and  varying  inversely 
with  the  resources  of  the  locality,  without  destroying  local 
initiative  or  restricting  it  unwisely. 

Libraries. — In  the  Census  reports  of  county  expendi- 
tures, the  administration  of  county  libraries  is  grouped 
with  that  of  the  schools  under  the  head  of  education. 
County  libraries  are  a  rather  recent  development,  the 
first  county  library  being  established  in  1901  in  Ohio  in 
consequence  of  a  legacy  left  by  a  private  citizen.  Only 
eleven  states  in  19 13  reported  expenditures  for  county 
library  administration,17  but  the  movement  is  spreading 
rapidly  and  other  states  have  passed  laws  authorizing 
counties  to  establish  libraries.18     The  need  of  county  li- 

17  New  York,  Ohio,  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  Nebraska, 
Maryland,  Kentucky,  Wyoming,  Oregon,  and  California. 

18  See,  Walter  A.  Dyer,  "  Putting  Character  into  the  Counties," 
in  World's  Work,  September,  1915,  reprinted  by  the  National  Short 
Ballot  Organization  in  their  collection  of  Documents  on  County 
Government. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     215 

braries  is  indisputable  in  view  of  the  fact  that  in  two- 
thirds  of  the  counties  of  the  whole  country  there  is  no 
public  library  of  any  kind  with  as  many  as  five  thous- 
and volumes,  and  in  those  counties  where  city  libraries 
exist  the  rural  county  dwellers  have  free  use  of  them  in 
only  about  a  hundred  counties.19 

In  the  development  of  county  libraries  California  leads, 
as  it  does  in  various  other  aspects  of  county  progress,  with 
the  largest  number  of  county  libraries,  although  Ohio 
reported  the  largest  expenditures  for  this  purpose  in  191 3. 
The  successful  experience  of  Van  Wert  County,  Ohio, 
the  pioneer  in  the  county-library  movement,  which  not 
only  developed  a  good  library  at  the  county  seat  but  made 
it  available  to  people  in  every  part  of  the  county  by  means 
of  branch  stations,  points  the  way  for  supplementing 
the  county  educational  work  for  school  children  by  pro- 
viding educational  opportunities  for  children  out  of  school 
and  for  adults,  by  means  of  free  library  facilities. 

A  large  number  of  states  have  created  public  library 
commissions  to  encourage  and  aid  cities  and  towns  to  es- 
tablish public  libraries,  but  with  limited  or  no  powers  of 
control.  Until  the  past  decade,  however,  almost  noth- 
ing was  done  to  make  libraries  available  to  the  rural  pop- 
ulation. The  county  would  seem  to  be  the  logical  unit  for 
the  administration  of  library  facilities  for  the  rural  por- 
tions of  the  population,  just  as  it  is  the  logical  unit  for 
rural  school  administration.  In  fact  the  economy  result- 
ing from  having  a  central  county  library  with  branches 
and  circulation  facilities,  instead  of  attempting  to  estab- 
lish a  separate  library  for  each  rural  village  or  hamlet  is 
obvious. 

19  Statement  of  Dr.  Claxton,  United  States  Commissioner  of  Edu- 
cation, quoted  in  the  article  cited  above,  "  Putting  Character  into  the 
the  Counties." 


216  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Public  libraries  are  primarily  educational  institutions. 
As  such  they  should  be  made  to  fit  into  the  general  ed- 
ucational scheme  and  should  be  conducted  as  part  thereof. 
In  the  counties,  as  in  the  cities,  therefore,  the  administra- 
tion of  public  libraries  should  be  entrusted  to  the  general 
educational  authorities  instead  of  creating  separate  bodies 
for  this  purpose.  The  immediate  direction  of  the  library 
facilities,  of  course,  must  be  put  into  the  hands  of  trained 
librarians,  if  the  greatest  results  are  to  be  obtained.  But 
the  expenses  of  public  libraries  should  form  part  of  the 
educational  budget  of  the  unit  which  they  serve,  and  their 
correlation  with  the  other  public  educational  activities 
should  be  insured  by  placing  them  under  the  educational 
administration.  In  the  same  way,  the  aid  granted  and 
supervision  exercised  by  the  state  over  this  branch  of  the 
educational  activities  should  be  lodged  in  the  hands  of 
the  state  educational  authorities,  not  entrusted,  as  it  now 
generally  is,  to  independent  boards  or  bureaus. 

One  other  matter  needs  to  be  emphasized  in  connection 
with  public  libraries,  particularly  with  county  libraries 
or  those  intended  to  serve  the  rural  population.  Because 
of  the  size  of  counties  and  the  scattered  nature  of  their 
rural  population,  an  expensive  central  public-library  build- 
ing with  reading-room  facilities  is  a  useless  extravagance 
that  can  serve  only  a  small  portion  of  the  rural  popula- 
tion and  that  requires  money  badly  needed  for  real  ser- 
vice. The  major  part  of  the  money  expended  for  rural 
library  facilities  should  go  into  books,  efficient  direction, 
and  circulation  facilities.  Branches  should  be  established 
in  all  rural  schools,  which  are  supposed  to  be  sufficiently 
numerous  and  properly  located  to  be  within  convenient 
reach  of  every  home  in  the  county.  Here  reading-room 
facilities  could  be  provided  without  appreciable  additional 
expense,  available  at  the  times  when  the  building  is  not 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS    217 

being  used  for  instruction  purposes,  and  from  this  point 
books  could  be  conveniently  withdrawn  for  home  use. 
This  additional  use  of  existing  or  necessary  school  build- 
ings presents  one  important  phase  of  the  general  prob- 
lem of  the  larger  use  of  the  school  plant,  another  aspect 
of  which  brings  up  the  consideration  of  the  school  as  a 
social  center.  The  latter  proposal  will  be  considered 
briefly  in  discussing  the  functions  of  the  county  under  the 
head  of  recreation. 

Highways. —  Next  to  education,  the  local  county  func- 
tion which  showed  the  greatest  expenditures  in  19 13  was 
that  of  road  and  bridge  construction.  The  total  county 
expenses  for  highways  in  191 3  was  $55,514,891.  This, 
it  must  be  remembered  included  only  the  cost  of  grading, 
repairs,  and  other  operating  expenses,  for  expenditures 
for  permanent  highways  were  listed  under  the  head  of  out- 
lays. One  of  the  significant  features  of  highway  admin- 
istration by  counties  lies,  however,  in  the  very  fact  that 
such  enormous  amounts  are  expended  for  temporary  im- 
provements and  repairs  required  each  year  because  of  the 
failure  to  build  permanent  roads. 

The  care  of  roads  and  bridges  was  one  of  the  earliest 
duties  of  a  local  nature  imposed  upon  counties,  though 
in  the  early  history  of  this  country  the  building  of  high- 
ways was  commonly  undertaken  by  private  capital  operat- 
ing under  turn-pike  franchises  and  reimbursing  itself  out 
of  tolls.  Expenses  for  highways,  like  expenditures  for 
education,  show  the  greatest  variations  in  the  various 
states  and  sections  of  the  Union.  Every  state  except 
Rhode  Island,  it  is  true,  reported  some  county  expendi- 
tures for  highways  in  19 13,  but  the  per  capita  expendi- 
tures varied  from  less  than  half  a  cent  in  New  Hampshire 
and  Vermont  to  $2.22  in  California.  The  New  England 
group  of  states  in  which  road  building  is  largely  a  func- 


218  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

tion  of  the  towns  with  state  aid,  showed  a  per  capita 
county  expenditure  of  only  $0.07  for  this  purpose,  while 
the  three  Pacific  states  reported  an  average  expenditure 
of  $2.09.  In  the  most  important  groups  of  states, 
from  the  point  of  view  of  size,20  and  in  the  West  South 
Central  states,  the  expenses  for  highway  administration 
constituted  the  largest  item  for  expense  for  local  county 
purposes,  and  in  two  other  groups  of  states  21  this  item 
amounted  to  more  than  the  expenditures  for  general  gov- 
ernment. 

In  spite  of  the  early  entry  of  the  county  into  the  field  of 
highway  and  bridge  administration,  of  the  almost  uni- 
versal participation  by  the  county  in  this  activity,  and  of 
its  tremendous  expense,  it  represents  one  of  the  least  suc- 
cessful of  county  undertakings.  By  its  very  nature  it  is 
a  kind  of  activity  in  which  ignorance,  wastefulness,  fav- 
oritism, and  corruption,  have  the  best  chance  of  playing 
an  important  role.  Wherever  the  system  of  county  high- 
way adminstration  has  been  subjected  to  careful  investi- 
gation, one  or  more  of  these  factors  have  been  found  to 
be  more  or  less  active  to  the  detriment  of  the  public  ser- 
vice and  the  public  treasury.22  Aside  from  the  general 
inability  of  the  average  county  board  to  deal  with  a  prob- 
lem which  is  so  technical  in  its  nature,  and  aside  from  the 
political  corruption  that  construction  companies  find  it 
profitable  to  engage  in  for  the  securing  of  and  playing 
off  on  contracts,  the  building  of  the  main  roads  with 
their  bridges  has  long  since  ceased  to  be  a  matter  of  purely 
or  even  chiefly  local  concern.  So  far  as  rural  roads  serve 
merely  to  connect  the  various  parts  of  the  county  with  the 

20  The   Middle   Atlantic,  East  North  Central,  West  North  Cen- 
tral groups. 

21  The   Southern   states   with  the  exception  of   the   West   South 
Central  group. 

22  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  Chap.  x. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     219 

county  seat  and  with  each  other  the  county  could  safely 
be  left  to  worry  along  with  such  roads  as  the  indifference, 
incapacity,  or  dishonesty  of  its  officials  and  general  iner- 
tia of  its  inhabitants  might  allow.  But  the  main  county 
roads  are  more  than  merely  local  arteries.  They  form 
links  in  a  chain  of  state  highways  and  must  provide  for 
traffic  that  neither  begins  nor  ends  in  a  given  county. 
To  that  extent  the  state  has  an  interest  which  is  para- 
mount to  that  of  the  county,  though  the  county,  of  course, 
benefits  locally  from  good  roads  in  spite  of  its  general 
disinclination  to  insist  upon  them.  To  conserve  the  in- 
terests of  the  state  in  the  provision  of  good  main  roads  or 
roads  of  more  than  local  significance  it  is  both  proper 
and  necessary  that  the  state  on  the  one  hand  contribute 
toward  the  expense  of  such  roads,  and  on  the  other  in- 
sure that  they  be  properly  built  and  adequately  cared  for. 

It  is  in  recognition  of  this  fact  that,  beginning  with 
New  Jersey  in  1891,  states  entered  upon  a  program  of 
state  aid  and  state  supervision  over  counties  and  other 
local  districts  in  the  matter  of  highway  construction. 
To-day  practically  every  state  in  the  Union  has  a  state 
highways  office  and  participates  to  some  extent  in  road 
building,  in  some  cases  merely  offering  expert  advice 
to  counties  in  their  road-building  problems,  in  others  pay- 
ing from  one-third  to  three-fourths  of  the  cost  of  building 
state  roads  under  the  direction  of  the  state  highway  of- 
fice. The  policy  of  state  aid  and  supervision  has  been 
most  extensively  followed  in  the  states  along  the  Atlantic 
seaboard  from  Virginia  north,  but  California  and  Wash- 
ington on  the  Pacific  and  some  of  the  Middle  Western 
states  have  also  gone  into  this  field  to  a  considerable  ex- 
tent. 

Within  recent  years,  and  particularly  as  a  result  of  the 
realization  of  the  importance  of  good  highways  for  mili- 


220  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

tary  transportation  during  the  recent  war,  the  Federal 
Government  under  its  powers  over  post  roads  has  also 
aided  in  the  good  roads  movement  by  appropriating 
millions  of  dollars  for  the  building  of  national  highways 
in  cooperation  with  the  states  who  in  turn  place  a  part  of 
the  burden  upon  the  counties.  In  this  way  the  counties 
are  enabled  to  secure  really  excellent  main  highways  at  a 
very  small  part  of  the  expense  to  them  which  would  be 
required  if  they  were  left,  as  formerly,  to  themselves. 
In  France,  it  may  be  pointed  out,  where  good  highways 
have  long  been  recognized  as  an  essential  element  of  na- 
tional military  defense,  the  main  roads,  not  only  through 
the  departments  but  also  through  the  communes,  which  in- 
clude all  cities,  are  under  the  direct  administration  of  the 
national  government. 

The  system  of  state  grants-in-aid  has  already  done 
much  to  improve  county  roads  in  many  of  the  states, 
though  it  is  true  that  in  many  counties  the  people  have 
been  unwilling  to  issue  bonds  for  good  roads  even  where 
a  large  part  of  the  expense  is  paid  by  the  state  and  na- 
tional governments  and  expert  supervision  of  construc- 
tion is  assured. 

Charities,  Hospitals,  and  Corrections. —  The  third 
most  important  class  of  county  governmental  expenses 
of  a  local  nature  is  grouped  in  the  Census  reports  under 
the  head  of  Charities,  Hospitals,  and  Corrections.  In 
1 91 3  the  total  expense  of  counties  under  this  head 
amounted  to  $37,815,508  representing  a  per  capita  ex- 
pense of  $0.44.  Aside  from  Rhode  Island,  which  as 
has  been  said,  shows  no  county  expenditures  whatever, 
Vermont  was  the  only  state  that  reported  no  county  ex- 
penditures for  these  purposes.  The  total  county  expen- 
ditures under  this  head  in  the  other  states  varied  from 
less  than  half  a  cent  per  capita  in  Maine  to  $1.58  per 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     221 

capita  in  Nevada.  The  group  showing  the  largest  expen- 
diture per  capita  under  this  head,  as  under  all  the  other 
heads  so  far  considered,  was  the  Pacific  group  with  a 
per  capita  expenditure  of  $0.80,  while  the  West  South 
Central  group  showed  the  smallest  per  capita  expenditure, 
$0.12,  being  less  even  than  that  of  the  New  England 
group  where  two  of  the  six  states  showed  no  county  ex- 
penditures for  this  purpose  and  another  a  per  capita  of 
less  than  half  a  cent. 

To  these  figures  must  again  be  added  a  proportionate 
share  of  interest  charges  and  outlays  for  these  purposes. 
That  this  would  be  a  considerable  item  in  many  states  is 
apparent  from  the  fact  that  the  total  value  of  lands,  build- 
ings, and  equipment  under  the  head  of  county  charities, 
hospitals,  and  corrections  was  reported  in  19 13  as 
$92,645,836,  only  a  little  less  than  the  value  of  schools 
and  libraries.  But  while  only  sixteen  states  showed  any 
county  property  under  the  head  of  schools  and  libraries, 
Massachusetts  was  the  only  state,  excepting  of  course 
Rhode  Island,  that  showed  no  property  devoted  to  char- 
ities, hospitals,  and  corrections. 

Poor  relief  was  never  an  important  function  of  the 
counties  in  the  American  colonies.  This  duty  had  been 
definitely  imposed  on  the  parishes  in  England  by  the 
Poor  Law  of  1601,  and  in  the  New  England  colonies  it 
early  became  one  of  the  duties  of  the  towns,  with  the 
power  in  the  county  court  to  determine  controversies  as  to 
the  duties  of  towns  to  provide  poor  relief  under  the  laws 
of  settlement.  In  the  middle  colonies  also  it  was  a  func- 
tion of  the  townships,  parishes,  or  boroughs  with  an 
appeal  to  the  county  court.  In  Virginia  and  South  Car- 
olina, also,  poor  relief  was  devolved  upon  the  parishes, 
though  about  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  the 
county  court  was  authorized  to  bind  out  poor  children, 


222  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

and  as  early  as  1668  county  commissioners  were  required 
to  provide  workhouses  with  the  assistance  of  the 
vestries.23 

The  later  tendency  in  the  new  states,  and  even  to  some 
extent  in  New  England,  was  to  entrust  the  function  of 
poor  relief  to  the  county,  though  at  first  in  the  Middle 
Western  states  it  was  entrusted  chiefly  to  the  townships, 
until  to-day  poor  relief  is  a  more  or  less  important  func- 
tion of  the  county  in  almost  every  state. 

The  record  of  the  American  county  as  an  agency  for 
poor  relief  is  not  an  enviable  one.  It  generally  has  taken 
the  form  either  of  haphazard  unscientific  out-door  relief, 
or  of  even  more  slip-shod  and  vicious  care  in  county  insti- 
tutions such  as  almshouses  and  poor  farms.  Children, 
the  aged  and  infirm,  the  defective,  the  sick,  the  insane, 
were  all  grouped  together  under  one  head  when  in  need 
of  public  aid,  and  were  commonly  confined  in  the  same 
institution,  which  not  infrequently,  in  the  absence  of  other 
facilities,  was  the  county  jail.  County  poorhouses  and 
farms  were  almost  never  properly  administered,  were 
frequently  uncomfortable,  insanitary,  or  even  indecent, 
and  the  system  was  shot  through  with  the  evils  of  the 
fee  system  in  connection  with  commitments  and  the  fur- 
nishing of  relief. 

This  sad  picture  of  county  poor  relief  is  unfortunately 
presented  even  to-day  in  a  very  large  number  of  states.24 
A  realization  of  the  unsatisfactory  status  of  county  poor 


23  See  Howard,  Local  Constitutional  History,  pp.  194-197. 

24  See  among  others :  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  Chap,  ix  and  Appen- 
dix F;  Ella  F.  Harris,  "Charity  Functions  of  the  Pennsylvania 
County,"  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social 
Science  (May,  1913),  p.  167;  Loeb,  "County  Government  in  Mis- 
souri," ibid.,  pp.  56-58;  Fairlie,  "County  and  Town  Government  in 
Illinois,"  ibid.,  pp.  60-70;  Burritt,  "County  Management  of  Char- 
ities, etc.  in  New  York,"  Proceedings  of  the  Conference  for  the  Study 
and  Reform  of  County  Government,  Second  Meeting,  p.  6. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     223 

relief  came  gradually  to  be  reflected  in  the  passage  of  laws 
requiring  segregation  of  these  various  classes  of  depen- 
dents and  their  care  in  different  institutions.  But  for  the 
great  majority  of  counties  it  remained  a  financial  impossi- 
bility to  provide  institutions  adapted  to  each  of  the  various 
classes  of  persons  falling  under  the  head  of  those  needing 
institutional  care.  In  the  more  populous  and  wealthy 
counties  special  homes  for  the  children,  asylums  for  the 
insane,  workhouses  for  the  able-bodied,  and  hospitals 
for  the  sick  might  be  provided  locally,  but  not  to  any 
great  extent  even  there.  For  this  reason  the  states  them- 
selves have  begun  to  provide  facilities  for  certain  of  these 
classes  of  dependents.  State  insane  asylums,  state  insti- 
tutions for  the  blind,  the  deaf  and  dumb,  and  the  feeble 
minded,  state  children's  homes,  state  hospitals,  and  even 
state  almshouses  have  been  established  to  an  increasing 
extent  since  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

But  these  institutions  rarely  are  able  to  take  care  of  all 
the  dependents  falling  within  the  various  classes,  and 
the  counties  even  in  the  states  providing  such  special 
institutions  pretty  generally  find  themselves  compelled  to 
take  care  of  various  types  of  paupers  requiring  separate 
treatment.  In  the  care  of  ordinary  paupers  little  im- 
provement has  been  made,  though  in  various  states  the 
central  agencies  for  charities  and  corrections  have  been 
given  some  authority  of  inspection  and  direction,  some- 
times coupled  with  provision  for  state  aid. 

What  is  true  of  charities  is  equally  true  of  corrections. 
It  has  already  been  seen  what  a  disgraceful  institution 
the  average  county  jail  is.25  Correctional,  as  distin- 
guished from  penal,  institutions  did  not  exist  in  the  coun- 
ties and  indeed  did  not  develop  at  all  until  the  latter  part 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  then  as  state  institutions. 

25  See  p.  201. 


224  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

At  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  state  prisons  were 
first  established,  thus  separating  the  worst  class  of  of- 
fenders from  the  others  confined  in  county  jails.  This 
movement  spread  very  rapidly  among  the  states.  Then 
followed  state  reform  schools  for  juvenile  offenders  and 
reformatories  for  adult  convicts.  But  the  county  jail 
has  continued  nevertheless  to  harbor  all  sorts  of  offend- 
ers, as  has  been  seen,  and  indeed  the  needs  and  resources 
of  the  typical  county  are  not  such  as  to  permit  of  special 
correctional  reform  institutions  in  addition  to  penal  in- 
stitutions. Much  could,  however,  be  done  that  is  not 
now  done,  to  make  the  county  jails  themselves  as  far 
as  possible  accord  with  modern  ideas  of  penology,  so  that 
even  if  they  do  not  turn  out  reformed  offenders,  they  will 
at  least  not  continue  to  remain  agencies  of  complete  de- 
moralization of  unconfirmed  offenders  and  schools  for 
crime  and  immorality. 

This  field  of  county  functions,  namely  charities  and 
corrections,  would  seem  by  its  very  nature  to  be  one  that 
is  not  adapted  to  performance  by  the  county.  The  num- 
ber of  the  various  classes  of  dependents  and  of  those  sen- 
tenced for  crime  would  normally  not  be  sufficiently  large 
in  the  average  county  to  warrant  the  special  institutions 
required  for  their  proper  treatment.  The  per  capita  ex- 
pense of  handling  these  various  classes  is  too  high,  except 
in  the  case  of  the  permanently  incapacitated  or  those  re- 
quiring merely  temporary  relief,  for  administration  by  a 
single  county.  It,  therefore,  should  be  undertaken  by 
the  state,  each  county  perhaps  contributing  a  portion  of 
the  expense  for  the  care  of  such  persons  properly  charge- 
able to  it,  as  is  now  done  in  some  instances.  But  if  the 
county  is  to  remain  charged  with  the  duty  of  caring 
for  some  or  all  of  these  public  wards,  the  state  must  step 
in  both  with  financial  aid  and  with  administrative  super- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     225 

vision,  combining  if  need  be  two  or  more  counties  for  the 
provision  of  adequate  institutions. 

Within  recent  years  a  new  form  of  relief  has  been  en- 
trusted to  the  counties,  in  some  of  the  states,  in  connec- 
tion with  mothers'  pensions.  Although  emphasis  is  placed 
upon  the  fact  that  this  is  not  intended  as  a  form  of  public 
charity,  in  reality  it  comes  under  the  head  of  charity  un- 
dertakings. This  new  movement  is  gaining  in  favor  but 
has  not  yet  made  any  great  progress,  partly  because  in 
some  cases  the  financial  burden  thus  imposed  upon  coun- 
ties cannot  be  met  out  of  available  county  revenues.  Not 
only  must  the  county  be  granted  special  sources  of  in- 
come to  undertake  its  share  of  this  extensive  new  under- 
taking, but  the  state  must  be  prepared  to  bear  a  large 
portion  of  the  expense  if  the  desired  object  is  to  be  at- 
tained. In  connection  with  this  aspect  of  county  activi- 
ties, as  with  all  the  other  functions  performed  by  the 
county,  the  question  of  financial  resources  plays  an  im- 
portant part,  as  will  be  seen  later  on.  Not  only  are 
many  of  the  rural  counties  poor  in  resources,  but  consti- 
tutional and  legal  limitations  commonly  prevent  the  ade- 
quate employment  of  such  resources  as  do  exist. 

County  hospitals,  particularly  for  tubercular  patients 
and  those  sick  with  contagious  diseases,  are  found  in  an 
increasing  number  of  states,  and  while  they  are  listed  with 
charities  and  corrections  they  are  also  properly  considered 
under  the  head  of  conservation  of  health,  as  they  serve 
not  merely  the  indigent  persons  admitted  to  them  but  the 
general  public  in  preventing  the  spread  of  contagious 
diseases. 

Sanitation  and  the  Conservation  of  Health. —  The 
next  largest  item,  among  the  classes  of  local  expenditures 
now  being  considered,  relates  to  public-health  activities  of 
the  counties,  the  total  expenditures  for  which  in   19 13 


226  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

were  reported  at  $2,815,466,  or  a  per  capita  expense  of 
only  $0.03.  None  of  the  New  England  states  showed 
any  county  expenditures  for  this  purpose,  but  otherwise 
Iowa  was  the  only  state  which  showed  no  such  expendi- 
tures, the  per  capita  figures  varying  from  one  cent  in  a 
number  of  states  to  sixteen  cents  in  Montana.  The  re- 
markably small  per  capita  expenditures  for  public  health 
show  very  clearly  how  inadequately  this  important  func- 
tion is  dealt  with  by  the  counties,  as  it  has  been  estimated 
that  adequate  public-health  protection  will  require  an 
average  per  capita  expenditure  of  at  least  ten  cents. 

Public-health  protection  represents  another  activity 
which  began  as  a  local  function  and  has  gradually  re- 
ceived more  and  more  attention  from  the  state  govern- 
ment. But  it  developed  almost  wholly  in  the  cities  while 
counties  did  next  to  nothing  in  this  direction  until  the 
state  laws  and  administration  began  to  compel  action. 
State  boards  of  health  date  in  this  country  from  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  Massachusetts  Board  of  Health  in 
1869,  but  they  did  not  obtain  real  authority  over  local 
areas  until  at  a  much  later  date.  Within  recent  years 
state  health  authorities  have  been  given  power  to  insist 
on  the  appointment  of  local  health  officers  in  counties  as 
well  as  in  cities  and  to  direct  the  execution  of  the  state 
laws  in  the  localities.  But  county  authorities  are  rarely 
given  any  ordinance  power  and  their  principal  activities 
are  still  confined  to  work  by  the  county  physician  in  treat- 
ing paupers,  prisoners,  and  inmates  of  other  county  insti- 
tutions, and  in  developing  special  activity  in  times  of  epi- 
demics or  threatened  epidemics. 

Public  health  administration  could  not  develop  to  a 
high  degree  of  efficiency  until  comparatively  recent  times 
because  the  great  discoveries  of  preventive  medicine  are 
the  product  of  the  last  decades,  and  in  many  important 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     227 

directions  of  the  last  twenty  years.  But  public-health 
administration  has  not  kept  pace  with  the  advance  of  sani- 
tary science  and  even  the  largest  and  most  progressive 
cities  have  not  approached  the  ideal  of  eliminating  all  pre- 
ventable disease.  The  rural  sections  have  lagged  far 
behind  the  urban  centers  in  public-health  work,  partly  be- 
cause of  general  debility  from  a  governmental  point  of 
view,  but  partly  also  because  it  has  always  been  believed 
that  public-health  problems  arise  only  in  cities  and  as  a  re- 
sult of  urban  conditions.  Recent  investigations,  how- 
ever, have  shown  not  only  that  the  standards  of  sanita- 
tion and  hygiene  in  the  rural  districts  are  as  bad  as  and 
frequently  worse  than  in  the  cities,  but  also  that  much  of 
the  rural  disease  is  easily  preventable  by  the  application 
of  the  principles  of  modern  sanitation  and  public  hygiene. 
Furthermore,  it  has  become  more  and  more  apparent  that 
the  rural  areas  could  not  be  allowed  to  ignore  the  care  of 
the  public  health  without  danger  to  others  than  merely 
the  inhabitants  of  the  local  areas.  Modern  developments 
in  transportation  and  travel  have  made  the  public-health 
problem  a  state-wide  and  even  nation-wide  concern  and 
inefficiency  or  neglect  in  a  relatively  restricted  area  may 
involve  serious  consequences  in  the  way  of  disease  and 
death  beyond  that  area.  This  is  especially  true  of  the 
food  supplies,  particularly  milk,  which  the  cities  secure 
from  the  rural  areas.  Consequently  the  logical  develop- 
ment in  public-health  administration  demands  an  ever 
increasing  centralization  in  the  state  authorities  with  su- 
pervisory and  coercive  power  over  the  localities.  Coun- 
ties, of  course,  have  a  primary  concern  in  the  health  of 
their  own  inhabitants,  but  they  cannot  safely  be  left  free 
to  omit  proper  measures  in  this  regard  because  of  the 
danger  involved  to  the  rest  of  the  state.  In  public  health 
as  in  public  education,   therefore,   the  establishment  of 


228  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

minimum  requirements  by  state  law  is  essential,  combined 
with  a  system  of  state  aid  and  state  supervision  in  the  in- 
terests of  encouraging  advanced  standards  of  public- 
health  administration.  Already  in  a  number  of  states 
the  central  government  and  the  county  are  working  to- 
gether to  this  end,  but  it  is  at  best  merely  a  beginning. 
The  recent  movement  for  public-health  nurses  in  counties, 
encouraged  and  partly  supported  by  the  American  Red 
Cross,  is  a  development  of  much  promise  for  the  improve- 
ment of  rural  health  conditions  which  has  already  re- 
ceived the  sanction  and  backing  of  the  public-health  au- 
thorities in  a  number  of  states. 

Recreation. —  The  next  most  important  class  of 
county  expenses  shown  in  the  Census  reports  for  the  year 
19 1 3  was  comprised  under  the  head  of  Recreation.  But 
this  item,  although  amounting  in  all  to  $419,556,  was 
almost  negligible  in  relation  to  other  county  expenditures, 
and  represented  a  per  capita  expenditure  of  less  than  one- 
half  cent.  Furthermore  only  sixteen  states  reported  any 
expenditures  at  all  under  this  head.  New  Jersey  alone 
reported  $300,791,  or  nearly  three-fourths  of  the  total 
amount;  California,  Massachusetts,  and  Ohio  following 
next  in  order  with  $45,344,  $19,987,  and  $19,955,  re- 
spectively, leaving  only  $33,479  to  be  distributed  among 
the  other  twelve  states  reporting  any  county  expenditure 
for  this  purpose. 

These  relatively  insignificant  expenditures  in  most  of 
the  states  represented  contributions  by  the  county  for 
county  fairs,  carnivals,  and  celebrations.  But  in  Cali- 
fornia, Massachusetts,  and  New  Jersey  the  returns  are 
of  real  significance  because  a  considerable  amount  of 
the  expenses  for  recreation  in  those  states  were  expended 
for  the  laying  out  and  maintenance  of  county  parks,  an- 
other new  development  in  county  functions.     The  chief 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     229 

expenditures  for  this  purpose  were  in  metropolitan  coun- 
ties such  as  Los  Angeles  County  in  California  and  Essex 
County  in  New  Jersey,  but  it  is  a  development  which 
promises  well  in  other  classes  of  counties  also,  and  since 
1 91 3   other  states  have  authorized  counties  to   provide 
park  systems.     In  Essex  County,  New  Jersey,  the  county 
park  commission  was  erected  as  an  independent  corpora- 
tion, the  commissioners  being  appointed  by  the  judges 
of  the  supreme  court,  because  the  regular  county  govern- 
ment was  not  trusted  to  handle  this  new  function  prop- 
erly.26    But  this  multiplication  of  authorities  is  obviously 
undesirable  and  public  recreation  is  properly  a  function 
that  should  be  handled  by  the  regular  county  government, 
provided  it  can  be  made  reasonably  representative  and 
efficient.     In     fact     the     extension     of     the     field     of 
county  functions,  by  giving  larger  powers  to  the  govern- 
ing bodies  of  counties  may  be  the  means  of  rescuing  the 
position  of  county  commissioner  from  the  obscurity  and 
unattractiveness  which  is  now  one  of  the  main  reasons 
for  the  mediocre  type  of  persons  who  are  interested  in 
holding  this  position  in  the  great  majority  of  counties. 
Within    recent    years    the    development    of    the    rural 
schoolhouse  as  a  social  center  promises  to  remedy  that 
lack  of  social  intercourse  and  sane  recreation  and  self- 
improvement  which  drives  many  persons  from  the  coun- 
try into  the  cities,  where  not  only  commercial  recreation 
but  public   recreation   facilities  to  an  increasing  extent 
cater  to  this  fundamental  human  need.27     This  develop- 
ment requires  the  recognition  of  its  importance  and  its 
encouragement  by  the  local  educational  authorities,  but 
as  an  important  social  welfare  activity  it  should  also  re- 
ceive the  support  of  the  regular  county  authorities. 

26  Gilbertson,  op.  cit.,  pp.  163,  164. 

27  See  Ward,  The  Social  Center  (New  York,  1913). 


230  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

A  significant  impetus  has  been  given  to  the  county  rec- 
reation movement  within  the  last  two  years  by  the  wide- 
spread interest  in  county  memorials  to  the  dead  of  the 
recent  war.  The  idea  of  making  these  memorials  ser- 
viceable as  well  as  commemorative  has  taken  hold  through- 
out the  country  in  the  form  of  movements  for  com- 
munity buildings  and  public  parks  that  will  serve  the 
social  and  recreational  needs  of  the  people  of  the  county. 
They  offer  also  some  promise  in  the  direction  of  bringing 
together  the  rural  population  of  the  county  with  the  citi- 
zens of  the  county  seat,  who  are  now  frequently  hostile  to 
each  other,  chiefly,  perhaps,  because  largely  strangers. 

Public  recreation  and  social  welfare  generally,  seem  to 
present  a  field  of  activity  in  which  the  inhabitants  of  the 
county  have  a  paramount  interest  and  which  they  should 
be  given  legal  and  financial  power  to  provide,  though 
here,  too,  the  state  might  stimulate  interest  and  action  by 
rendering  some  financial  assistance.  It  must  not  be  for- 
gotten in  this  connection,  nor  indeed  in  connection  with 
the  discussion  of  any  phase  of  county  government  and 
functions,  that  the  American  county  is  for  the  most  part 
an  artificial  unit.  The  inhabitants  of  a  given  county  have 
few  social  and  economic  interests  in  common  and  little 
basis  for  a  community  of  feeling,  growing  out  of  asso- 
ciations and  traditions.  If  the  county  is  to  become  a 
successful  area  of  local  government,  therefore,  everything 
that  tends  to  amalgamate  the  population  and  create  a 
county  community  sentiment  becomes  of  vital  importance, 
and  public  recreation  offers  one  of  the  most  promising 
opportunities  for  hastening  this  process. 

Public-Service  Enterprises. —  The  last  class  of  county 
expenditures  to  be  considered  under  this  general  group 
of  local  functions  is  that  for  public-service  enterprises. 
This  represents  an  even  more  insignificant  activity,  meas- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     231 

ured  from  the  point  of  view  of  expenditures,  than  that  of 
recreation,  the  total  expenses  for  this  purpose  in  191 3 
being  reported  as  only  $189,122.  Furthermore  only 
fourteen  states  showed  any  county  expenses  at  all  for 
public-service  enterprises,  and  these  all  came  from  only 
twenty-eight  counties  out  of  more  than  three  thousand. 
The  total  value  of  lands,  buildings,  and  equipment  of 
county  public-service  enterprises  was  reported  as 
$2,125,710,  distributed  in  thirteen  states.  Three  of  the 
states  showing  expenses  for  this  purpose  reported  no 
property  values  under  that  head,  while  two  states  showed 
property  values  for  county  public-service  enterprises  but 
no  expenses.  Two  more  states  showed  receipts  from 
public-service  enterprises,  but  no  expenses  and  no  prop- 
erty values.  The  total  number  of  states  then  from  which 
county  public-service  enterprises  were  reported  was 
eighteen,  and  the  total  number  of  counties  was  forty. 

The  expenditures  reported  under  the  head  of  county 
public-service  enterprises  were  for  a  variety  of  purposes 
including  ferries,  toll  bridges,  wharves,  drainage  ditches, 
cemeteries,  dispensaries,  memorial  halls,  and  the  sale  of 
seed  and  grain  to  farmers.  In  some  states  counties  are 
authorized  by  law  to  provide  public  utilities  of  almost 
any  kind,  but  this  power  has  practically  not  been  used. 
For  many  kinds  of  public-service  enterprises  in  the  rural 
sections  over  which  the  county  might  be  given  authority 
such  as  drainage  and  irrigation  districts,  levees,  and  dikes, 
the  usual  practice  is  to  create  special  improvement  dis- 
tricts. For  undertakings  which  extend  beyond  the  limits 
of  a  single  county  this  method  presents  the  only  practic- 
able solution.  But  for  public-service  undertakings  within 
the  limits  of  a  single  county  it  would  be  much  better  to 
entrust  the  administration  to  the  county  with  the  power  to 
levy  special  assessments  on  the  property  benefited,  than 


2$2  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

to  erect  special  corporations  with  independent  govern- 
mental machinery  and  taxing  powers.  In  fact  the  ten- 
dency to  multiply  within  the  county  the  number  of  special 
independent  corporations  with  taxing  powers  is,  as  will 
be  seen,  one  of  the  weaknesses  of  our  system  of  local  gov- 
ernment, caused  in  part  by  the  constitutional  debt  limita- 
tions and  other  financial  handicaps  placed  upon  the  coun- 
ties. 

It  seems  likely  that  with  increased  population  and  the 
growth  of  interurban  utilities  the  county  may  become  a 
more  important  unit  for  public-service  undertakings,  but 
at  present  it  can  scarecly  be  said  to  perform  a  very  im- 
portant function  in  that  field. 

Miscellaneous  Expenses. —  The  Census  figures  for 
19 1 3  reported  under  the  head  of  miscellaneous  expenses 
the  sum  of  $5,574,800,  an  amount  considerably  larger 
than  the  totals  for  public  health,  public  libraries,  recrea- 
tion, and  public-service  enterprises  put  together.  This 
amount  represents  expenses  reported  but  not  so  itemized 
as  to  be  capable  of  classification  under  any  of  the  enum- 
erated heads.  It  throws  no  light,  therefore,  on  the  ex- 
tent of  particular  county  functions,  but  must  be  included 
in  the  grand  total  of  expenses,  and  introduces  a  source 
of  slight,  though  appreciable,  error  into  all  the  other  cal- 
culations. It  does  throw  some  light,  however,  on  the 
unsatisfactory  condition  of  accounting  and  reporting 
methods  in  counties,  which  has  already  been  referred  to 
and  which  will  be  considered  again  under  the  next  section 
dealing  with  county  finances. 

County  Finances 

County  Revenues. —  So  far  as  we  have  been  consid- 
ering what  the  county  as  a  governmental  unit  does  and 
how  much  money  it  spends  on  each  class  of  activities. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     233 

There  remain  to  be  considered  the  sources  of  revenue 
available  to  the  county,  the  kinds  of  revenue  actually  re- 
ceived, and  the  methods  of  finance  administration. 

Adopting  the  United  States  Census  classification  of 
county  revenues  we  shall  consider  them  under  two  general 
heads,  revenue  receipts  and  non-revenue  receipts,  for  the 
year  19 13,  the  last  year  for  which  complete  reports  were 
available. 

Revenue  Receipts. —  The  term  revenue  receipts  as 
employed  in  the  Census  reports  is  applied  to  "  the  moneys 
and  other  wealth  received  by  governmental  units  for 
governmental  purposes,  which  increase  their  aggregate 
assets  without  increasing  their  debt  liabilities."  Revenue 
receipts  of  counties  so  defined  are  classified  under  four- 
teen heads  which,  ranked  in  the  order  of  the  amounts 
received  from  each  source,  are  as  follows :  General  Prop- 
erty Taxes;  Earnings  of  General  Departments;  Subven- 
tions and  Grants;  Special  Assessments  and  Charges  for 
Outlays ;  Liquor  Licenses  and  Other  Imposts ;  Poll  Taxes ; 
Interest  and  Rents;  Fines,  Forfeits,  and  Escheats;  Non- 
business License  Taxes ;  Business  Licenses  other  than 
Liquor  Licenses ;  Special  Property  Taxes ;  Earnings  of 
Public  Service  Enterprises ;  Donations  and  Gifts ;  and 
Highway  Privileges.  The  total  amount  of  these  reve- 
nue receipts  reported  in  19 13  was  $370,043,046  repre- 
senting per  capita  revenue  receipts  of  $4.32,  as  compared 
with  total  governmental  cost  payments  of  $385,181,760, 
or  $4.49  per  capita,  for  the  same  year.  But  the  govern- 
mental cost  payments  included  outlays  for  permanent  im- 
provements, a  part  of  which  at  any  rate  were  paid  for 
out  of  funds  received  from  the  issue  of  debt  obligations 
during  that  year,  which  source  of  income  is  not  listed 
under  revenue  receipts  but  under  the  head  of  non-revenue 
receipts  to  be  considered  later. 


234  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

General  Property  Taxes. —  By  far  the  most  important 
source  of  county  revenue  receipts  is  the  general  property 
tax.  The  total  income  from  this  source  in  19 13  was 
$282,077,069,  a  per  capita  income  of  $3.29,  or  more  than 
76  per  cent  of  the  total.  In  every  state  in  the  Union, 
except  Rhode  Island  where  counties  have  no  taxing  power, 
the  general  property  tax  represented  the  source  from 
which  much  the  greater  part  of  the  total  revenue  receipts 
were  derived.  The  per  capita  income  from  this  source 
varied  from  $0.07  in  Vermont  to  $15.64  in  California, 
and  by  groups  of  states  from  $0.77  in  New  England  to 
$12.48  in  the  Pacific  group,  the  second  most  important 
group  from  the  point  of  view  of  receipts  from  the  general 
property  tax  being  the  Mountain  group  28  with  a  per  capita 
figure  of  $7.81. 

The  taxing  power  of  counties  is  limited  in  various 
ways.  In  the  first  place,  counties  enjoy  the  taxing  power 
only  to  the  extent  that  it  is  expressly  conferred  upon  them, 
both  as  regards  the  kinds  and  the  amount  of  taxation. 
In  the  second  place,  the  power  of  taxation  by  counties  is 
subject,  of  course,  to  all  the  limitations  which  the  Federal 
Constitution  imposes  upon  the  taxing  power  of  the  states, 
for  what  the  state  may  not  do  it  cannot  authorize  its 
subordinate  governmental  divisions  to  do.  These  limi- 
tations cannot  be  considered  in  detail  here,  but  they  in- 
clude among  other  restrictions,  prohibitions  on  taxing 
Federal  agencies  or  instrumentalities,  imports  and  ex- 
ports, interstate  commerce,  as  also  limitations  imposed  by 
the  Fourteenth  Amendment.29 

28  Montana,  Idaho,  Wyoming,  Colorado,  New  Mexico,  Arizona, 
Utah,  and  Nevada. 

29  For  a  detailed  discussion  of  the  relation  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution to  the  taxing  power  of  municipalities,  which  presents  the 
same  phases  as  it  does  with  regard  to  counties,  see  Dillon,  op.  cit., 
Chap,  xxvii. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     235 

In  the  third  place,  all  state  constitutions  have  general 
provisions  that  limit  the  exercise  of  the  taxing  power  in 
various  ways  and  that  apply  to  the  subdivisions  of  the 
state  as  well  as  to  the  legislature.  Chief  among  these 
are  the  requirement  that  taxation  must  be  for  a  public 
purpose,  and  the  requirement,  still  found  in  the  consti- 
tution of  a  number  of  states,  that  taxes  shall  be  equal  and 
uniform. 

In  the  fourth  place,  the  constitutions  of  about  a  third 
of  the  states  contain  special  provisions  relating  to  the 
taxing  power  of  counties.  So,  for  example,  they  limit 
the  rate  of  taxation  that  may  be  levied  by  counties  under 
the  general  property  tax  to  a  fixed  maximum  per  hundred 
dollars  of  assessed  valuation,  but  permitting  in  some  cases 
that  maximum  to  be  exceeded  upon  a  referendum  vote 
in  the  county.  These  constitutional  limits  are  set  at  as 
low  a  figure  as  $0.50  on  the  hundred  dollar  valuation  in 
some  states.30  So  also,  they  forbid  taxation  for  certain 
purposes. 

Finally,  the  legislatures  of  most  states  have  fixed  a 
maximum  rate  of  taxation,  in  addition  to  specifying  the 
purposes  for  which  various  proportions  of  the  levy  may 
go,  and  describing  in  detail  the  manner  of  assessing  the 
property  and  collecting  the  tax. 

The  constitutional  and  legislative  restrictions  on  the 
taxing  power  of  counties  were  intended,  in  the  language 
of  a  number  of  the  constitutions,  "  to  prevent  abuses." 
But  as  is  the  case  with  so  many  of  the  checks  and  sup- 
posed safe-guards  that  characterize  the  American  con- 
stitutional system,  the  limitations  have  been  more  success- 
ful in  preventing  progress  than  in  abolishing  abuses.  A 
fixed  and  arbitrary  maximum,  unless  put  high  enough  to 
be  of  no  practical  effect,    fails  to  take  account  of  the 

30  E.  g.  Arkansas. 


236  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

great  differences  that  exist  among  counties  as  regards 
their  resources  and  needs,  and  assumes  that  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  local  taxpayers  are  certain  to  indulge 
in  improper  extravagance  unless  effectively  checked.  But 
with  the  increasing  burdens  that  have  been  thrown  upon 
the  county  by  the  state,  and  the  increasing  local  needs  re- 
sulting from  increased  population  and  expanding  concep- 
tions of  what  governments  are  supposed  to  do,  these  limi- 
tations are  quite  as  likely  to  hamper  counties  in  the 
legitimate  and  necessary  extension  of  their  activities,  as 
they  are  to  prevent  improper  expenditure.  This  latter 
result  is,  in  fact,  already  being  experienced  in  the  coun- 
ties of  a  number  of  states.  If  restrictions  on  the  amount 
of  taxation  are  desirable,  and  to  a  certain  extent  they  are 
necessary  both  for  the  protection  of  the  local  taxpayers 
and  of  the  larger  state  interests,  they  could  better  be  se- 
cured by  requirements  of  local  referenda  and  of  approval 
by  state  administrative  authorities  in  a  position  to  give 
proper  weight  to  the  special  considerations  of  local  re- 
sources and  needs  in  each  county. 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  in  an  earlier  chapter 
that  the  process  of  assessment  of  property  for  taxation, 
performed  as  it  is  for  the  most  part  by  untrained  politi- 
cians, presents  a  most  unsatisfactory  phase  of  tax  admin- 
istration. The  interests  of  the  local  taxpayers  suffer  be- 
cause this  important  function  is  performed  by  unqualified 
amateurs  instead  of  by  competent  experts,  and  the  inter- 
ests of  the  state,  which  derives  most  of  its  revenues  from 
the  general  property  tax,  suffer  because  the  temptation 
for  each  county  to  escape  its  fair  share  of  state  taxation 
leads  to  systematic  undervaluation.  State  supervision 
over  this  phase  of  tax  administration  is,  therefore,  essen- 
tial if  county  officers  are  to  continue  as  agents  of  the 
state  for  assessment  purposes. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     237 

Earnings  of  General  Departments. —  Next  in  impor- 
tance, as  a  source  of  revenue  receipts,  though  far  behind 
the  general  property  tax,  come  the  earnings  of  the  general 
departments  of  county  government.  The  total  income 
from  this  source  in  1913  was  $28,564,467,  amounting  to 
$°-33  per  capita,  or  a  little  more  than  7.5  per  cent  of 
the  total  revenue  receipts  of  counties.  The  per  capita 
income  from  this  source  varied  from  $0.01  in  Vermont 
to  $1.20  in  Nevada. 

This  amount  represents  chiefly  the  fees  and  charges 
received  by  the  counties  for  services  performed  by  their 
general  departments,  and  differs  from  taxation  in  that  it 
is  based  on  benefits  received  and  is  borne  by  the  persons 
directly  served  instead  of  by  the  general  public.  This 
aspect  of  the  fee  system,  as  has  been  pointed  out,  is  not 
objectionable,  though  where  the  act  performed  is  required 
by  the  state,  and  the  general  public  good  demands  its 
accomplishment,  as  in  the  case  of  the  recording  of  deeds, 
the  issuance  of  marriage  licenses,  etc.,  it  would  be  proper 
for  the  public  to  bear  a  part  of  the  expense.  But  if  the 
states  that  do  not  limit  the  amounts  which  the  officers 
performing  these  acts  may  derive  in  total  fees  to  a  rea- 
sonable remuneration  for  the  work  performed  would  do 
so,  this  source  of  county  income  might  be  considerably 
increased  in  many  counties. 

Subventions  and  Grants. —  Of  nearly  equal  importance 
with  the  earnings  of  general  departments  as  a  source  of 
county  revenues  in  19 13  were  subventions  and  grants, 
which  totalled  $23,682,813,  or  $0.28  per  capita,  consti- 
tuting something  over  6.5  per  cent  of  the  total  revenue 
receipts.  These  consisted  for  the  most  part  of  financial 
aid  extended  to  the  counties  by  the  states. 

It  is  worth  noting  that  while  general  property  taxes  and 
earnings  of  general  departments  were  reported  as  sources 


238  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  county  revenue  receipts  in  every  state  except  Rhode 
Island,  one-fourth  of  the  states,  in  addition  to  Rhode  Is- 
land, reported  no  income  from  subventions  and  grants 
in  191 3.  Of  the  New  England  states  Connecticut  alone 
showed  any  receipts  from  this  source.31  In  the  states 
showing  any  entries  under  this  heading,  the  per  capita 
amounts  varied  from  less  than  one-half  of  one  cent  in 
Arkansas  to  $2.51  in  California,  the  per  capita  figures  for 
groups  of  states  showing  the  largest  amount  again  in  the 
Pacific  states,  though  Maryland  ranked  next  after  Cali- 
fornia in  this  respect. 

As  has  already  been  pointed  out,  there  are~two  impor- 
tant aspects  of  the  policy  of  rendering  state  financial  aid 
to  county  governments.  In  the  first  place,  the  county, 
though  no  longer  purely  an  agency  of  the  state  govern- 
ment, is  performing  some  purely  state  functions  and 
others  that  are  of  direct  benefit  to  the  state  as  a  whole. 
The  state,  which  has  sources  of  revenue  not  available  to 
the  counties,  should  bear,  therefore,  a  part  of  this  expense, 
especially  in  view  of  the  limitations  which  are  imposed 
on  taxation  by  the  county.  In  the  second  place,  the  ex- 
tending of  state  aid  to  counties  upon  certain  conditions 
enables  the  state  to  exercise  effective  supervision  over 
county  functions  in  which  it  has  a  vital  interest  without 
arousing  the  opposition  of  local  sentiment  against  state 
interference.  The  Census  reports  distinguish  between 
subventions  as  contributions  received  with  certain  pre- 
scribed conditions,  and  grants  as  contributions  made  with- 
out the  prior  establishment  of  conditions.  But  the  sta- 
tistics are  not  given  separately  for  the  two  classes  of  con- 
tributions. It  would  seem,  however,  that  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  system  of  subventions  in  the  states  which  do 

31  In  Vermont  $1,200  was  reported  as  the  total,  less  than  .4  per 
cent  of  the  county  revenue  receipts  in  that  state. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     239 

not  now  employ  it,  and  the  proper  extension  of  its  appli- 
cation in  the  states  where  now  found  would  at  one  and 
the  same  time  relieve  counties  of  an  unfair  burden  and 
operate  in  the  direction  of  satisfactory  state  supervision 
and  control. 

The  state  aid  reported  in  191 3  was  chiefly  for  educa- 
tion and  highway  purposes,  though  in  some  states  coun- 
ties receive  a  portion  of  the  state  income  from  certain 
sources,  such  as  state  lands,  without  any  designation  of 
the  purpose  to  which  the  income  is  to  be  applied. 

Special  Assessments. —  The  next  most  important  source 
of  county  revenue  receipts,  judged  from  the  total  amount 
received,  is  that  derived  from  special  assessments,  which 
the  Census  defines  as  proportional  contributions  of  wealth 
levied  against  land  and  collected  from  its  owners  and 
occupants  to  defray  the  costs  of  specified  public  improve- 
ments made,  or  of  specified  services  undertaken,  in  the 
interest  of  the  general  public.  But  this  definition  omits 
the  fundamental  distinction  between  special  assessments 
and  other  forms  of  taxation  which  rests  in  the  fact  that 
while  taxes  are  levied  without  reference  to  the  special 
benefits  which  the  contributors  may  individually  derive 
from  the  public  purposes  for  which  the  taxes  are  required, 
special  assessments  do  rest  upon  the  basis  of  such  special 
benefits,  and  the  amounts  derivable  from  such  assessments 
are  limited  by  the  increase  in  value  of  the  property  as- 
sessed.32 

The  total  income  from  special  assessments  in  1913  was 
$9,323,978,  a  per  capita  income  from  this  source  of  only 
$0.1 1,  or  2.5  per  cent  of  the  total  revenue  receipts.  Fur- 
thermore, this  item  of  income  appeared  in  the  returns 
from  only  a  little  more  than  half  the  states.  None  of 
the  New  England  states,  only  two  of  the  eight  South  At- 

32  See  Dillon,  op.  cit.,  Chap,  xxviii. 


24o  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

lantic  states,  and  three  of  the  eight  Mountain  states 
showed  any  county  income  from  this  source.  In  the 
twenty-seven  states  in  which  this  item  appeared  as  a 
source  of  county  revenue,  the  per  capita  income  varied 
from  less  than  one-half  cent  in  five  states  83  to  $0.54  in 
Ohio. 

This  source  of  revenue,  which  was  most  extensively 
used  in  the  Middle  Western  states,  would  seem  to  offer 
larger  possibilities  of  financial  relief  for- the  public  works 
undertaken  by  counties  than  have  yet  been  realized.  It 
is  an  eminently  fair  burden,  since  it  is  roughly  propor- 
tioned to  the  property  increases  enjoyed  by  the  persons 
taxed  and  is  in  most  cases  limited  to  such  increase.  The 
extension  of  the  power  of  levying  special  assessments  to 
counties  in  those  states  where  it  is  not  now  granted  and 
the  more  extensive  use  of  the  power  where  it  exists  but 
is  only  slightly  used,  are  developments  that  would  help 
solve  the  increasingly  acute  problem  of  securing  suffi- 
cient county  revenues. 

Liquor  Licenses  and  Other  Imposts. —  One  important 
source  of  county  revenue  in  a  number  of  states  in  191 3 
has  now  completely  disappeared  as  the  result  of  the  adop- 
tion of  the  Prohibition  Amendment  to  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution. The  total  county  revenues  from  this  class  of 
receipts  in  the  twenty-seven  states  in  which  this  item  ap- 
peared were  $6,577,556  or  $0.08  per  capita,  constituting 
1.9  per  cent  of  the  total  revenue  receipts,  most  of  which 
came  from  liquor  licenses.  Under  the  system  of  local 
option  on  liquor  licenses  for  counties,  there  were  in  19 13, 
more  than  seven  hundred  counties  that  derived  an  income 
from  this  source,  which  now,  as  the  result,  first  of  the 
spread  of  no-license  areas,  then  of  state-wide  prohibition, 
and  now  of  the  Eighteenth  Amendment,  must  turn  to 

33  New  Jersey,  Tennessee,  Arkansas,  Texas,  and  Colorado. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     241 

other  sources  to  supply  the  former  income  from  liquor 
licenses. 

Poll  and  Occupation  Taxes. —  Poll  and  occupation  taxes 
constitute  the  next  largest  source  of  county  revenues  and 
are  defined  by  the  Census  as  all  exactions  from  private 
individuals  which  are  levied  without  regard  to  the  prop- 
erty or  income  of  the  taxpayer.  They  include  capita- 
tion taxes,  poll  taxes  graded  in  amounts  according  to  oc- 
cupation, and  all  exactions  of  personal  service,  such  as 
work  upon  the  highways. 

The  total  income  from  these  sources  was  reported  in 
1913  at  $5,817,855,  a  per  capita  income  of  $0.07,  amount- 
ing to  1.5  per  cent  of  the  total  income.  Income  from 
this  source  was  reported  from  twenty-nine  states,  limited 
to  the  Southern  and  Western  states.  Sometimes  these 
poll  taxes  are  levied  as  part  of  the  property  tax  on  all 
males  of  voting  age  with  certain  exemptions,  sometimes 
they  are  virtually  optional  contributions  as  conditions 
precedent  to  voting.  In  some  of  the  Southern  states  they 
are  imposed  rather  as  a  check  on  the  negro  vote  than  as 
a  source  of  revenue.  Their  importance  as  a  source  of 
revenue  is  limited  to  a  relatively  few  states  34  and  they 
have  the  serious  drawback  of  constituting  a  taxpaying 
qualification  for  the  franchise,  small  though  it  be. 

Interest  and  Rents. —  Almost  of  equal  importance  as 
a  total  source  of  revenue  with  poll  taxes,  was  the  income 
counties  derived  in  191 3  from  interest  and  rents,  which 
included  receipts  from  rents  of  real  property  belonging 
to  investment,  sinking,  and  public  trust  funds  and  from 
other  real  property  owned  by  counties  but  not  set  apart 
for  the  use  of  any  particular  department. 

34  Notably  Arizona,  Idaho,  Kentucky,  Montana,  Mississippi,  North 
Carolina,  North  Dakota,  and  Tennessee  where  the  per  capita  reve- 
nue is  from  $0.20  to  $0.67. 


242  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  total  revenues  from  this  source  amounted  to 
$5,531,485,  a  per  capita  revenue  of  $0.06,  or  about  1.3 
per  cent  of  the  total  revenues.  This  source  of  revenue 
was,  however,  much  more  general  than  poll  taxes,  as 
Delaware  was  the  only  state,  in  addition  to  Rhode  Island, 
that  reported  no  county  revenue  from  this  source.  The 
highest  per  capita  revenues  from  this  source  were  found 
in  the  Middle  Western  states.35 

Fines,  Forfeits,  and  Escheats. —  The  last  source  of 
county  revenues  that  yielded  nearly  1  per  cent  on  the 
total  county  revenue  receipts  in  19 13  were  those  classed 
under  this  heading,  the  three  subdivisions  of  which  are 
defined  by  the  Census  as  follows.  Fines  are  amounts  of 
wealth  extracted  from  individuals,  firms,  and  corpora- 
tions, under  the  sovereign  power  of  inflicting  punishment 
for  violation  of  law.  Forfeits  are  amounts  accruing  to 
government  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  contracts 
as  penalties  for  non-observance  of  such  contracts.  Es- 
cheats are  amounts  of  money  received  from  the  disposal 
of  properties  the  owners  of  which  cannot  be  ascertained 
or  located. 

This  source  of  revenue,  totaling  $3,531,485,  or  $0.04 
per  capita,  was  reported  from  all  but  five  of  the  states, 
the  per  capita  yield  varying  from  less  than  one-half  cent 
in  three  states  to  $0.19  in  Arizona  and  Florida. 

Miscellaneous  Revenue  Receipts. —  The  remaining  six 
classes  of  revenue  receipts  listed  in  the  Census  reports 
amounted  in  the  aggregate  to  $4,844,250  or  a  little  more 
than  1  per  cent  of  the  total.  Because  of  their  relative 
insignificance  they  need  not  be  considered  separately  in 
detail.  N on-business  license  taxes  were  reported  from 
nearly  all  states,  except  those  in  the  New  England  group. 

35 $0-37  per  capita  in   Indiana;  $0.19  per  capita  in  Missouri  and 
North  Dakota. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     243 

Business  licenses  other  than  liquor  licenses  were  the 
source  of  county  revenues  in  thirty  states,  mounting  in 
Nevada  as  high  as  $0.82  per  capita.  Special  property 
taxes,  that  is,  direct  taxes  levied  upon  property  which  are 
assessed,  levied,  and  collected  by  methods  not  generally 
employed  in  the  case  of  real  property,  were  reported  from 
twelve  states.  They  included  chiefly  corporation  taxes 
of  various  kinds.  Earnings  of  public  service  enterprises 
were  reported  from  a  third  of  the  states.36  Finally,  do- 
nations and  gifts,  which  aggregated  $283,233  for  all 
counties,  were  reported  from  an  equal  number  of  states. 

There  would  appear  to  be  little  prospect  of  enlarging 
the  revenue  receipts  of  counties  from  these  sources  to 
any  considerable  extent.  License  taxes  might  perhaps  be 
used  more  extensively  and  counties  might  well  be  accorded 
a  larger  share  of  the  taxes  imposed  upon  corporations 
owning  property  or  doing  business  within  their  limits. 
But  the  relief  which  counties  need  in  the  direction  of 
larger  revenues  will  have  to  come  chiefly  from  an  expan- 
sion of  some  of  the  other  sources  of  county  income,  as 
indicated  in  the  preceding  pages. 

Non-Revenue  Receipts. —  Non-revenue  receipts  in- 
clude all  receipts  other  than  the  revenue  receipts  already 
considered.  They  are  classified  in  the  Census  reports 
under  five  sources:  (1)  Sales  of  investments  and  sup- 
plies; (2)  Trust  and  agency  transactions;  (3)  Counter- 
balancing transactions;  (4)  General  transfers;  and  (5) 
Issue  of  debt  obligations.  Only  the  last  source  of  non- 
revenue  receipts  need  concern  us  here,  for  the  first  class 
of  receipts  totaled  only  $3,383>3°4  for  all  counties,  and 
the  other  three  classes  did  not  represent  an  actual  increase 
of  the  financial  resources  of  the  county.  The  receipts 
from  trust  and  agency  transactions  were  not  available  for 

36  See  supra,  p.  231,  for  expenses  of  public-service  enterprises. 


244  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

county  expenditures,  and  the  counterbalancing  transac- 
tions and  general  transfers  did  not  affect  the  total  re- 
sources of  the  counties  at  all. 

Receipts  from  the  issue  of  debt  obligations,  however, 
did  constitute  an  important  item  in  the  financial  resources 
available  for  county  purposes,  for  while  they  were  offset 
by  corresponding  debt  liabilities,  the  receipts  were  im- 
mediately available,  while  interest  and  repayment  of  the 
capital  were  spread  over  future  years. 

Of  the  total  receipts  from  the  issue  of  debt  obligations, 
amounting  in  191 3  to  $86,051,348,  or  a  little  more  than 
one  dollar  per  capita,  the  smallest  per  capita  receipts  were 
in  the  New  England  group,  $0.48  and  the  largest  in  the 
Pacific  group,  $2.31.  Every  state  in  the  Union,  except 
Rhode  Island,  reported  county  receipts  from  this  source, 
varying  from  $0.08  per  capita  in  Vermont  to  $4.83  in 
Montana. 

The  power  of  counties  to  issue  debt  obligations,  like 
the  taxing  power,  is  exercisable  only  to  the  extent  and  in 
the  manner  in  which  it  is  expressly  granted  by  the  consti- 
tutions or  by  acts  of  the  state  legislatures.  Constitutional 
grants  of  power  to  incur  indebtedness  are  rare,  but  con- 
stitutional restrictions  on  this  power  are  very  general.37 

In  the  first  place,  three-fourths  of  the  state  constitutions 
expressly  prohibit  counties  from  incurring  debts  for  the 
purpose  of  aiding  private  or  corporate  enterprises,  with 
certain  specified  exceptions.  This  general  prohibition 
dates  from  the  era  of  railroad  building  when  it  was  quite 
common  for  counties  to  be  authorized  by  the  state  legisla- 
tures to  subscribe  to  the  capital  stock  of  proposed  rail- 
roads through  their  territory. 

37  See  Index  Digest  of  State  Constitutions,  prepared  for  the  New 
York  State  Constitutional  Convention,  1915,  under  title  Counties, 
Subtitle,  Debt,  pp.  271-289. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     245 

In  the  second  place,  in  fully  half  of  the  state  constitu- 
tions there  are  provisions  that  prohibit  counties  from  in- 
curring indebtedness,  with  certain  specified  exceptions, 
except  upon  approval  of  the  qualified  electors  or  taxpayers 
of  the  county,  either  by  simple  majority  vote  or  by  a 
designated  vote  greater  than  a  majority.  The  exceptions 
relate  chiefly  to  indebtedness  below  a  certain  amount,  or 
for  special  purposes,  particularly  for  the  refunding  of 
valid  bonds.  These  restrictions  have  been  generally  re- 
produced in  the  legislation  authorizing  county  bond  issues 
in  those  states  also  that  do  not  have  constitutional  re- 
strictions of  this  kind. 

Thirdly,  more  than  half  of  the  state  constitutions  im- 
pose a  limit  beyond  which  the  counties  may  not  become 
indebted,  with  or  without  a  local  referendum,  and  no 
matter  for  what  purpose.  These  constitutional  debt 
limits  vary  greatly  in  the  different  states,  from  2  per  cent 
of  the  assessed  property  valuation  to  as  high  as  25  per 
cent  for  specified  purposes,  in  addition  to  other  county 
indebtedness. 

Finally,  a  considerable  number  of  state  constitutions 
contain  provisions  relating  to  the  length  of  time  for  which 
bonded  indebtedness  may  run  and  requiring  provision  for 
the  collection  of  an  annual  tax  sufficient  to  pay  the  inter- 
est and  create  a  sinking  fund  adequate  to  pay  the  principal 
at  maturity.  These  limitations  are  also  quite  generally 
found  in  the  laws  of  the  states  without  such  constitutional 
provisions. 

The  power  to  incur  indebtedness  and  to  issue  negotiable 
bonds  evidencing  the  same  is  a  very  necessary  one  for 
counties.  It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  at  the 
end  of  19 1 3  the  total  value  of  lands,  buildings,  and 
equipment  of  counties  amounted  to  the  sum  of 
$576,656,715,  or  $6.72  per  capita.     This  property  rep- 


246  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

resented  improvements  of  a  more  or  less  permanent  na- 
ture which  would  last  for  a  number  of  years.  The  ex- 
penditures for  such  improvements  in  the  one  year 
mentioned  amounted  to  nearly  $90,000,000,  or  more  than 
23  per  cent  of  the  total  governmental  cost  payments. 
Such  a  sum  could  not  be  raised  by  taxation  in  a  single 
year  without  superimposing  a  very  serious  burden  on  the 
taxpayers  already  charged  with  meeting  the  operating  ex- 
penses of  the  county  government.  Nor  would  it  be  fair 
or  wise  finance  to  attempt  to  raise  such  a  sum  in  one  year 
for  improvements,  the  benefits  of  which  would  last  for 
many  years.  Such  a  policy  would  soon  cripple  the  coun- 
ties to  the  point  where  needed  improvements  could  not 
be  financed.  A  better  plan,  therefore,  is  to  distribute  the 
cost  of  such  improvements  over  the  period  of  years  f:>r 
which  they  are  serviceable. 

But  this  method  of  financing  permanent  improvements, 
while  reasonable  in  theory,  presents  many  serious  dan- 
gers in  practice.  The  temptation  to  use  the  borrowing 
power  for  paying  for  current  expenses,  the  attraction  of 
making  loans  for  a  given  improvement  run  for  a  longer 
time  than  the  life  or  usefulness  of  the  improvement, 
the  danger  of  failing  to  observe  proper  measures  for  cre- 
ating the  necessary  sinking  fund,  are  all  possibilities  that 
spell  ultimate  financial  disaster  unless  they  are  carefully 
guarded  against.  More  important  than  the  limitations 
imposed  upon  the  total  amount  of  bonded  indebtedness 
of  counties,  are  safeguards  against  these  abuses  of  the 
borrowing  power.  And  these  are  matters  which  legisla- 
tion may  cover  in  detail  but  which  experience  shows  can- 
not be  adequately  dealt  with  by  legislation  alone.  They 
require  for  their  adequate  treatment,  expert  administra- 
tive supervision  by  higher  authorities.  Even  the  appar- 
ently simple  matter  of  fixing  the  maximum  amount  of 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     247 

authorized  indebtedness  is  a  subject  that  cannot  be  prop- 
erly governed  by  rigid  constitutional  or  statutory  limita- 
tions. The  general  financial  conditions  of  each  county, 
the  fundamental  needs  that  have  not  yet  been  met,  the 
nature  of  the  purpose  for  which  a  bond  issue  may  be 
desired,  the  relation  between  market  values  and  assessed 
values,  are  all  factors  that  influence  the  propriety  of  a 
proposed  additional  indebtedness,  much  more  than  does 
the  mere  relation  of  bonded  indebtedness  to  assessed  val- 
uation. 

In  this  respect  the  example  of  England  which  for  half 
a  century  has  controlled  the  matter  of  indebtedness  by 
local  government  corporations  through  the  Local  Govern- 
ment Board,  a  central  department  equipped  with  an  ade- 
quate staff  of  experts  in  local  finance,  seems  to  point  the 
way  for  progress  in  this  respect  in  the  United  States. 
This  English  department  authorizes  loans  only  after  care- 
ful investigation  of  all  the  factors  involved  and  imposes 
conditions  on  the  raising  and  expenditure  of  the  funds  de- 
rived from  this  source  which  by  a  continuing  inspection 
it  can  enforce.  These  are  technical  matters  of  finance 
administration  which  the  local  electorate  is  in  no  position 
to  judge  of  or  control,  except  in  a  purely  negative  way. 
The  refusal  of  the  local  taxpayers  to  authorize  a  pro- 
posed loan  may  be  a  proper  reason  against  making  it, 
though  even  that  is  doubtful,  but  their  approval  is  not 
necessarily  a  proper  reason  for  authorizing  it.  The  local 
taxpaying  electorate  may  be  quite  willing  to  shift  pres- 
ent burdens  to  future  years  to  an  extent  and  in  a  manner 
that  cannot  be  permitted  if  ultimate  insolvency  is  to  be 
avoided.  On  the  other  hand  the  reaching  of  an  arbitrary 
or  statutory  debt  limit  may  not  in  a  given  case  throw  the 
least  light  on  the  question  of  whether  a  proposed  bond 
issue  is  necessary  or  advisable. 


248  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Practically  no  steps  have  been  taken  in  this  country 
in  the  direction  of  administrative  control  of  county  in- 
debtedness. In  some  states,  it  is  true,  the  attorney  gen- 
eral of  the  state  is  required  to  approve  of  bonds  before 
they  can  be  legally  issued.  But  such  approval  depends 
merely  on  the  compliance  by  the  county  with  the  legal 
formalities  prescribed  as  to  the  manner  of  authorizing 
the  loan,  the  proper  local  referendum,  the  legality  of  the 
purposes  of  the  loan,  and  its  relation  to  the  established 
debt  limit.  It  is  not  dependent  in  any  way  upon  consid- 
erations of  expediency  or  necessity,  nor  is  the  subsequent 
administration  of  the  debt  incurred  subject  to  the  super- 
vision of  the  attorney  general.  What  is  needed,  there- 
fore, is  the  substitution  of  a  competent  administrative  con- 
trol for  the  present  rigid,  inexpert,  constitutional  and 
legislative  control,  supplemented  by  the  requirement  of 
local  referenda.  If  counties  are  to  carry  on  their  func- 
tions in  a  way  to  meet  the  expanding  needs  of  government, 
they  must  be  given  larger  borrowing  powers.  But  those 
larger  powers  must  be  adequately  supervised  in  the  inter- 
ests of  sound  finance. 

Budgets  and  Accounting. —  So  far  we  have  been  con- 
cerned in  this  chapter  with  the  things  which  county  gov- 
ernments do,  how  much  they  spend,  and  where  they  get 
the  necessary  funds.  It  remains  to  consider  briefly  the 
questions  of  accounting  and  budgets,  the  former  dealing 
with  the  records  of  the  financial  transactions  involved 
in  county  activities,  the  latter  with  the  orderly  planning 
of  county  expenditures  and  their  relation  to  county  in- 
come. As  the  second  aspect  of  county  finance  is  depend- 
ent upon  the  proper  performance  of  the  first,  the  matter 
of  county  accounting  will  be  first  considered. 

The  inefficiency  and  generally  unsatisfactory  nature 
of  county  government  is,  perhaps,  nowhere  better  re- 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     249 

fleeted  than  in  the  matter  of  handling  the  county  finances. 
At  any  rate  we  have  more  definite  and  tangible  evidence 
of  such  inefficiency  in  this  phase  of  county  government  as 
a  result  of  numerous  investigations  made  within  recent 
years  into  the  state  of  the  accounting  and  general  business 
methods  of  counties,  than  in  the  various  individual  fields 
of  activity.  Indeed  it  is  largely  as  a  result  of  such  in- 
vestigations that  our  knowledge  of  the  general  weakness 
of  county  administration  has  become  definite  and  demon- 
strable.38 

It  is  not  possible  here  to  reproduce  the  evidence  of  dis- 
honesty, carelessness,  and  lack  of  system  in  the  handling 
and  reporting  of  county  finances  which  these  investiga- 
tions have  brought  to  light.39  One  competent  investi- 
gator has  declared  that  inefficient  organization  and  admin- 
istration result  in  more  than  doubling  the  cost  of  county 
government   over   what   would   be   required    for   doing 

38  Among  recent  investigations  going  into  county  accounting  and 
budgets  may  be  mentioned :  The  reports  of  the  Chicago  Bureau  of 
Public  Efficiency  on  Cook  County,  111. ;  Crecraft,  "  The  Govern- 
ment of  Hudson  County,  New  Jersey";  "Milwaukee  County 
(Wis.)  Government,"  bulletin  of  the  Milwaukee  City  Club;  publica- 
tions of  the  Westchester  County  (N.  Y.)  Research  Bureau;  bulle- 
tins of  the  Alameda  County  (Cal.)  Tax  Association;  reports  of 
the  Civic  League  of  Cleveland,  Ohio ;  "  Government  of  Monroe 
County,"  for  the  New  York  Constitutional  Convention  Commission ; 
"  Government  of  Nassau  County,"  Commission  on  the  Government 
of  Nassau  County,  N.  Y. ;  "  City  and  County  Administration  in 
Springfield,  111.,"  Russell  Sage  Foundation;  Maxey,  "County  Ad- 
ministration." 

39  See  also,  Boyle,  "  County  Budgets,"  Annals  of  the  American 
Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science  (May,  1913) ,  pp.  199- 
212;  Cartwright,  "Some  Needs  to  be  Considered  in  Reconstructing 
County  Government,"  Proceedings  of  the  First  Conference  for  Bet- 
ter County  Government,  pp.  5-20;  Rockefeller,  "County  Govern- 
ment from  the  State  Comptroller's  Standpoint,"  Proceedings  of 
the  Conference  for  the  Study  and  Reform  of  County  Government, 
Third  Meeting,  pp.   12  ff. 


250  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

efficiently  the  things  the  county  now  does  inefficiently. 
Here  obviously  is  the  most  promising  field  for  increasing 
county  resources,  by  making  every  dollar  now  spent  do 
more  than  double  its  present  duty. 

The  installation  of  proper  accounting  methods  and  the 
insistence  on  their  being  employed  are  very  clearly  not 
matters  which  the  local  electorate  can  insure.  Something 
could  be  done  and  something  has  been  done  by  providing 
county  auditors  with  power  to  insist  on  scientific  account- 
ing methods  and  to  disallow  improper  expenditures.  But 
the  public  is  not  in  a  position  to  elect  such  an  officer  on 
the  basis  of  his  technical  qualifications  or  to  check  up  on 
the  proper  performance  of  his  highly  intricate  duties. 
The  only  remedy  seems  to  lie  in  the  system  of  state  audit- 
ing of  local  accounts.  Uniform  county  accounting  on  a 
scientific  basis  is  not  only  of  the  utmost  importance  to 
the  state  in  supervising  the  performance  of  the  func- 
tions performed  by  the  county  for  the  state,  but  it  is  also 
important  for  the  counties  themselves  in  furnishing  a 
basis  of  comparison  of  their  expenditures  and  returns 
with  those  of  other  counties. 

Within  recent  years  there  has  been  marked  progress  in 
the  direction  of  state  control  over  local  accounts,  particu- 
larly since  1902  when  Ohio  adopted  a  comprehensive  sys- 
tem of  uniform  accounting,  reporting,  and  auditing,  for 
every  public  office,  state  and  local.  Other  important 
states  followed  until  now  more  than  half  of  the  states 
exercise  some  supervision  over  county  accounting. 
There  still  remains  a  great  deal  to  be  done,  however, 
before  adequate  state  supervision  in  this  direction  is  gen- 
erally secured. 

Scientific  accounting  is  the  sine  qua  non  of  a  correct 
budget  system,  and  the  latter  cannot  be  looked  for  until 
the  former  is  attained.     Of  the  importance  of  the  budget 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     251 

in  governmental  administration  nothing  need  here  be  said. 
In  the  United  States  we  are  unfortunately  suffering  from 
its  almost  universal  absence  in  our  governments,  from 
that  of  the  Federal  state  down  through  our  states  to  the 
smallest  governmental  unit  we  have.  But  in  our  local 
governments,  there  is  another  condition  precedent  to  a 
real  budget,  and  that  is  the  centralization  of  all  the  ap- 
propriating power  in  the  hands  of  a  single  body.  Until 
all  sources  of  county  income  are  subject  to  a  single  au- 
thority which  can  apportion  them  according  to  the  needs 
of  the  county  as  a  whole,  there  can  be  none  of  that  care- 
ful planning  which  is  the  essence  of  the  budget.  Simpli- 
fication of  the  governmental  machinery  of  the  county  and 
centralization  of  responsibility  must  precede,  therefore, 
the  establishment  of  a  really  satisfactory  budget  system. 
But  even  with  conditions  as  they  are,  real  progress  can  be 
made  in  almost  every  county  by  the  adoption  of  proper 
accounting,  reporting,  and  auditing  methods  and  the  sys- 
tematic planning  of  proposed  expenditures  with  refer- 
ence to  estimated  income,  combined  with  strict  control  to 
assure  expenditures  in  accordance  with  appropriations, 
that  constitute  basic  elements  of  every  governmental  bud- 
get. 

Summary  of  Functions  of  County  Government. — 
Viewing  counties  as  a  whole,  then,  from  the  point  of 
view  of  their  functions,  and  keeping  in  mind  the  extensive 
variations  that  make  all  generalizations  hazardous,  it  may 
be  said:  (1)  that  counties  are  quasi-public  corporations 
of  limited  express  powers;  (2)  that  county  functions  fall 
into  two  general  classes,  those  of  preeminently  state  con- 
cern, and  those  of  primarily  local  concern;  (3)  that  the 
state  functions  are  more  generally  performed  by  counties 
than  the  more  local  functions,  and  require  about  half  of 
the  expenses;  (4)  that  among  the  local  functions  high- 


252 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 


SUMMARY  OF  RECEIPTS  OF  COUNTIES,  1913  * 


Revenue  Receipts: 

Total 

Per  Capita 

Per  Cent 

Earnings   of   Gen'l    Dept's..  . 
Subventions  and  Grants  .... 

Special    Assessments     

Liquor  Licenses  and  Imposts 
Poll    Taxes    

Fines,   Foreits,   and    Escheats 

$282,077,062 
28,564,467 
23.682,813 
9,323,978 
6,577,556 
5,817,855 
5,531,485 
3,531,537 
4,936,293 

$329 
•33 
.28 
.11 
.08 
.07 
.06 
.04 
.05 

$4.32 

$0.04 
1. 00 

$1.04 

$5-36 

76.3 
7-5 
6-5 
2.5 
1-9 
i-5 
i-4 
■9 
1-3 

Non-Rei'enue  Receipts: 

Sales   of    Investments,    etc... 
Issue  of  Debt  Obligations   .. 

$370,043,046 

$     3.383,364 
86,051,348 

100. 0 

96.1 
3-9 

$  89,434,712 
$459,477,758 

100  0 

Totals    of    Revenue    and    Non-Rev- 

ways,  charities,  and  education  are  the  most  widespread 
and  account  for  much  the  largest  part  of  the  expenditures 
in  this  group,  while  public  health,  recreation,  and  public 
service  enterprises  are  found  to  a  limited  extent  only 
among  county  functions  and  involve  the  expenditure  of 
relatively  small  amounts  of  money  at  present;  (5)  that 
state  control  over  education,  highways,  charities,  and 
public  health  is  steadily  increasing;  (6)  that  counties  are 
strictly  limited  by  constitutional  and  legal  restrictions  in 
their  taxing  and  borrowing  powers;  (7)  that  county 
finance  administration  is  from  nearly  every  point  of  view 
inefficient;  and  (8)  that  the  remedy  for  this  condition 
must  be  found  in  the  system  of  state  administrative  con- 
trol which  is  beginning  to  be  exercised  over  assessments 
of  property,  and  accounting  methods,  and  which  should 
be  extended  to  the  matter  of  indebtedness. 


*  Trust  and  agency  transactions,  counterbalancing  transactions,  and  general 
transfers  are  omitted  from  this  table  as  not  throwing  any  light  on  the  real  re- 
ceipts and  payments  of  counties  as  local  government  units. 


COUNTY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS     253 

SUMMARY  OF  RECEIPTS  OF  COUNTIES,   1913  * 


Governmental  Cost  Payments; 


Total  Per  Capita 


Per  Cent 


State    Functions: 

General  Government   

Protection   to   Persons   and 
Property     

Totals    

Local  Functions: 

Schools    

Highways    

Charities,      Hospitals      and 

Corrections     

Public    Health    

Recreation    

Libraries     

Expenses  of  Public-Service 

Enterprises    


$102,334,964 

15,213,229 

$117,548,193 


Totals    

Miscellaneous 
Interest  .... 
Outlays      .... 


Total     Governmental     Cost 

Payments    

N  on-Governmental     Cost     Pay- 
ments: 

Purchase     of     Investments 

and  Supplies    

Redemption   of   Debt    Obli- 
gation     


Totals    

Totals   of   Governmental    and    Non- 
governmental  Cost   Payments    .  . . 


$  57, 

55, 


682,193 
514,891 

,815,508 
,815,466 
419,556 
364,712 

189,122 


$154 
$  5 
$  17 


801,450 
574,800 

417.593 
839,726 


$385,181,760 

$  5,106,811 
$  58,965,207 


$  64,072,018 
$449,253,778 


$1.19 


.18 


$0.67 
.65 

•44 

.03 

Less  than  V*  cent 


$1.79 
$0.07 
$0.20 
$1.05 


$4.49 

$0.06 

.69 

$0-75 

$5-24 


26.5 
4.0 


30.5 


14.9 
14.4 


9-8 
•  7 
Negligible 


25.8 
i-5 
4-5 

23-3 


8.0 
92.0 


1 00.0 


"  Trust  and  agency  transactions,  counterbalancing  transactions,  and  general 
transfers  are  omitted  from  this  table  as  not  throwing  any  light  on  the  real  re- 
ceipts and  payments  of  counties  as  local  government  units. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY  i 

Having  considered  the  organization  and  functions  of 
the  county  as  the  basic  unit  of  local  government  in  the 
United  States,  it  remains  to  consider  the  governmental 
units  smaller  than  the  county,  for  in  all  states  there  are 
such  subdivisions.  The  organization  and  functions  of 
these  subdivisions  have  an  intimate  relation  to  the  gen- 
eral county  government,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out, 
for  one  of  the  most  distinguishing  features  of  the  dif- 
ferent types  of  county  government  found  in  the  United 
States  was  seen  to  lie  in  the  importance  accorded  to 
these  subdivisions  as  compared  with  the  county  itself. 

As  the  principal  distinctions  between  counties  from  this 
point  of  view  are  to-day  very  similar  to  those  already 
noted  in  the  discussion  of  counties  in  colonial  times,  it 
is  convenient  to  adopt  the  same  grouping  for  purposes 

1  The  development  of  the  township  in  the  United  States  from 
colonial  times  to  about  1890  is  set  forth  in  considerable  detail  in 
Howard,  Local  Constitutional  History,  Part  I.  The  most  compre- 
hensive treatment  of  the  minor  divisions  of  the  American  county 
is  to  be  found  in  Fairlie,  Local  Government  in  Counties,  Towns 
and  Villages,  Part  III,  to  which  the  author  is  largely  indebted  for 
the  descriptive  material  in  the  present  chapter.  Briefer  references 
will  be  found  in  Munro,  The  Government  of  the  United  States, 
Chap,  xxxix ;  Beard,  American  Government  and  Politics,  Chap, 
xxix;  Hart,  Actual  Government  (New  York,  1908),  Chap,  x;  and 
Bryce,  1  he  American  Commonwealth,  rev.  edition  (New  York, 
1910),  Vol.  I,  pp.  600-603.  Mention  may  also  be  made  of  the  arti- 
cle on  Towns  and  Townships,  in  the  Cyclopedia  of  American  Gov- 
ernment, and  the  discussion  in  Bulletin  No.  12  of  the  Illinois  Leg- 
islative Reference  Bureau  prepared  for  the  Constitutional  Convention 
on  County  and  Local  Government  in  Illinois. 

254 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       255 

of  discussion  here.  Accordingly  the  New  England  town, 
the  Central  townships,  and  the  county  districts  of  the 
South  and  West,  will  be  separately  considered.  The 
smaller  urban  divisions  such  as  villages,  towns,  and  bor- 
oughs will  be  considered  together,  while  the  larger  urban 
units  commonly  designated  cities  will  be  considered  sep- 
arately in  the  two  following  chapters. 

The  New  England  Town 

In  an  earlier  chapter  it  has  been  pointed  out  that  in  New 
England  the  town  antedated  the  county,  and,  indeed,  in 
some  of  the  colonies  the  colonial  government  itself,  and 
that  even  with  the  subsequent  introduction  of  the  county 
system,  the  town  remained  the  constitutional  unit  as  re- 
garded fiscal  and  military  matters  and  the  selection  of 
representatives  in  the  colonial  legislature.  This  position 
of  relative  importance  the  New  England  town  has  in  gen- 
eral preserved  until  the  present  day,  while  not  only  the 
position  of  the  town  but  its  very  organization  even,  are 
not  appreciably  different  to-day  from  what  they  were 
nearly  three  hundred  years  ago.2 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  New  England 
town  to-day,  as  in  colonial  times,  is  not  necessarily  or 
even  usually  an  aggregation  of  inhabitants  in  a  relatively 
restricted  area.  On  the  contrary,  the  typical  town  in- 
cludes considerable  rural  territory  in  which  there  may 
be  one  or  more  settlements  or  villages,  the  average  area 
of  such  towns  approximating  in  geographical  extent  the 
Western  congressional  townships  of  nearly  thirty-six 
square  miles.  The  New  England  town  is  in  fact  the  pri- 
mary unit  of  local  government,  there  being  normally  no 
other  smaller  units  except  the  incorporated  cities,  which 
commonly  have  absorbed  the  former  town  governments 

2  See  Chap,  ii,  above. 


256  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  same  name.  In  Massachusetts  there  are  no  other 
units  of  local  government  below  the  town,  while  in  New 
Hampshire  and  Vermont  the  few  existing  incorporated 
villages  are  parts  of  the  towns  in  which  they  lie.  In  Con- 
necticut there  were  in  1910  twenty-six  incorporated  bor- 
oughs, and  in  Maine  twenty-one  incorporated  villages. 
In  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  and  Vermont  there  remain  a 
few  vestiges  of  the  older  rural  subdivisions  under  the 
names  of  plantations,  grants,  gores,  and  locations,  and  in 
northern  Maine  there  are  a  large  number  of  townships 
laid  out  in  a  more  recent  period  on  the  rectangular  plan 
of  the  Western  townships. 

There  were  in  19 10  some  1,400  towns  in  New  Eng- 
land, varying  in  population  from  as  few  as  thirteen  in 
Millsfield  town,  New  Hampshire,  to  as  many  as  27,792  in 
Brookline,  Massachusetts.  Of  the  total  number,  more 
than  1,100,  or  over  three- fourths,  contained  less  than 
2,500  inhabitants  and  were  classed,  therefore,  as  rural 
communities  by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census.  A  relatively 
small  number  of  towns  showed  a  population  exceeding 
five  thousand,  and  in  not  all  of  these  was  the  population 
wholly  centered  in  one  community,  so  that  real  urban 
conditions  were  met  with  in  comparatively  few  of  these 
towns. 

Towns  were  not  regarded  as  corporations  in  any  sense 
until  near  the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century  when  they 
were  accorded  the  right  to  sue.  Not  until  1785  were  the 
towns  incorporated  by  general  law  and  accorded  the  us- 
ual corporate  powers  to  sue  and  be  sued  as  corporations, 
to  hold  and  dispose  of  real  and  personal  property,  and  to 
make  contracts  in  execution  of  their  functions.  For  a 
long  time  New  England  towns,  particularly  in  Rhode  Is- 
land and  Connecticut,  claimed  the  possession  of  certain 
inherent  and  inalienable  rights  and  powers,  but  the  law 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY      257 

is  clearly  established  that  they  derive  all  their  powers  from 
legislative  grant  and  can  exercise  no  powers  not  so  con- 
ferred, with  the  corollary  that  their  powers  are  subject 
to  amendment  or  repeal  by  the  legislature  unless  protected 
by  constitutional  provisions.3  Such  constitutional  pro- 
visions in  the  New  England  states  are  rare,  the  principal 
ones  being  those  relating  to  the  right  of  the  towns  as  cor- 
porations to  choose  representatives  in  the  state  legisla- 
ture, except  in  Maine  and  Massachusetts  where  the  county 
is  made  the  electoral  district  for  the  state  legislature.4 
As  a  matter  of  fact  the  towns  are  subject  to  continual  in- 
terference by  the  legislature,  especially  in  the  matter  of 
having  additional  duties  thrown  upon  their  officers  by  the 
state.5 

In  addition  to  their  corporate  powers,  the  New  England 
towns  enjoy  a  wide  range  of  powers  conferred  upon  them 
by  general  or  special  legislative  acts,  some  of  which  en- 
large their  freedom  of  action,  but  many  of  which,  as  has 
been  pointed  out,  impose  mandatory  obligations.  The 
original  powers  of  towns,  which  were  broad  in  their  day, 
have  been  amplified  to  meet  the  needs  of  larger  aggre- 
gations of  people  and  more  extensive  conceptions  of  gov- 
ernmental functions,  and  the  range  of  activities  of  these 
units  to-day  approximates  that  of  the  incorporated  city. 
The  power  of  enacting  by-laws  or  ordinances  for  the 
preservation  of  peace  and  order  and  the  internal  police  of 
the  towns,  and  the  power  to  levy  and  collect  taxes  for  the 
management  of  their  prudential  affairs,  have  grown  with 

3  See,  Dillon,  Municipal  Corporations,  fifth  edition,  Vol.  I,  §§ 
40-42. 

4  As  a  result  of  the  representation  guaranteed  to  the  towns  in  the 
other  New  England  states,  there  are  glaring  inequalities  of  repre- 
sentation in  favor  of  the  smaller  towns  which  have  led  to  their  being 
designated  as  "  rotten  boroughs." 

6  See,  Munro,  The  Government  of  the  United  States,  p.  567. 


258  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  enlarged  significance  attached  to  these  terms  to-day, 
while  the  original  town  functions  of  poor  relief,  highway 
construction  and  repair,  and  the  support  of  schools  have 
also  imposed  ever  increasing  burdens  upon  them.  The 
development  of  public  services  in  modern  times  has  been 
reflected  in  increased  powers  and  resources  accorded  to 
the  towns  to  provide  such  services. 

It  will  be  seen  from  this  enumeration  that  many  of  the 
important  functions  of  rural  government  which  are  else- 
where, as  has  been  shown,  commonly  entrusted  to  coun- 
ties, are  in  New  England  left  in  the  care  of  the  towns. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  more  strictly  urban  needs  of  more 
congested  settlements,  which  in  other  parts  of  the  country, 
as  will  appear,  were  met  by  the  practice  of  incorporating 
these  settlements  as  villages,  boroughs,  or  towns,  have 
also  in  large  part  been  left  with  the  town  in  New  Eng- 
land. In  19 10  there  were  in  the  whole  of  New  England 
less  than  a  hundred  incorporated  cities  taken  out  of  the 
town  system  of  government,  and  even  in  some  of  these 
the  town  organization  continues  alongside  of  the  city  gov- 
ernment. It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  New  England 
town  maintains  its  position  of  importance  in  the  local 
government  system  of  the  United  States. 

The  Town  Meeting. —  It  is  not  merely,  however,  be- 
cause of  its  prominence  as  a  local  government  unit  that 
the  New  England  town  commands  attention.  In  its  or- 
ganization and  political  characteristics  it  holds  a  unique 
place  in  our  American  polity,  for  it  presents  the  sole 
instance  of  a  direct  democracy  amid  the  representative 
types  of  government  adopted  by  all  of  our  other  govern- 
mental units,  national,  state,  and  local.  Legally  speaking 
the  town  is  the  aggregate  of  the  qualified  electors 
thereof,  and  it  functions  through  the  direct  action  of  these 
constituent  members  in  town  meeting  assembled. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY      259 

In  colonial  times  there  were  different  classes  of  dwellers 
within  the  towns,  but  all  male  inhabitants  of  legal  age  were 
entitled  to  share  in  the  deliberations  of  the  town  meeting.6 
To-day,  still,  all  persons  recognized  as  qualified  electors 
under  the  state  laws  are  entitled  to  attend  and  participate 
in  the  town  meetings.  This  means,  broadly,  adult  suf- 
frage, with  a  minimum  residence  in  the  local  jurisdiction, 
subject  to  certain  disqualifications,  such  as  the  receipt  of 
poor  relief,  insanity,  etc.,  and  in  two  of  the  New  England 
states  subject  also  to  a  literacy  requirement.  The  exten- 
sion of  the  suffrage  to  women  by  the  Nineteenth  Amend- 
ment has,  of  course,  doubled  the  electorate,  but  formerly 
women  were  admitted  only  to  vote  for  school  officers. 

The  calling  of  the  town  meetings  is  subjected  to  rather 
strict  formalities,  which  are  almost  identical  to-day  with 
the  early  procedure  in  colonial  times.  The  time  for  the 
annual  meeting  is  fixed  by  law  for  the  Spring  in  most  of 
the  New  England  states,  the  exact  date  being  determined 
by  action  of  the  selectmen  who  issue  warrants  to  the  town 
constables  to  notify  the  townsmen  and  warn  them  to  at- 
tend, though  the  earlier  practice  of  calling  at  each  house, 
has,  of  course,  been  superseded  by  more  general  means  of 
publicity.  In  case  of  failure  of  the  selectmen  to  act, 
citizens  may  appeal  to  the  justices  of  the  peace  for  the  is- 
suance of  the  necessary  warrants.  Return  of  such  no- 
tice and  warning  must  be  made  to  the  town  clerk  by  the 
constables  before  the  date  of  the  meeting. 

These  warrants  must,  in  order  to  be  legally  valid,  state 
the  time  and  place  of  the  meeting,  and  also  the  business 
to  be  considered  as  prepared  by  the  selectmen.7     No  other 

6  Property  qualifications  were  established  limiting  the  right  to 
vote  for  certain  officers.     See,  Howard,  op.  cit.,  p.  62. 

7  For  samples  of  such  warrants  calling  town  meetings  see  Fairlie, 
op.  cit.,  pp.  150  and  153,  and  Beard,  op.  cit.,  p.  556. 


260  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

business  may  be  considered  at  the  meeting  except  that 
enumerated  in  the  warrant.  At  the  annual  meetings  the 
most  important  business  includes  the  election  of  town  of- 
ficers for  the  ensuing  year,  the  hearing  of  and  acting  on  the 
reports  of  the  town  officers  and  committees,  the  voting 
of  appropriations,  and  the  passage  or  amendment  of  by- 
laws. Special  meetings  may  be  called  in  the  same  man- 
ner during  the  year,  but  usually  only  two  or  three  such 
meetings  are  summoned. 

The  place  of  meeting  is  regularly  in  the  town  hall, 
which  is  supposed  to  be  located  near  the  geographical 
center  of  the  town.  This  may  sometimes  be  in  the  princi- 
pal village  or  settlement  within  the  town,  or  it  may  be  out 
in  the  open  country,  if  there  are  several  such  settlements. 
Of  the  qualified  voters  entitled  to  attend  usually  not 
more  than  half  are  present,  and  frequently  much  less  than 
that  proportion.  In  the  smaller  towns  the  ratio  of  attend- 
ance seems  to  be  higher  than  in  the  more  urban  towns,  for 
in  the  former  the  annual  town  meeting  retains  its  social 
and  ceremonial  aspects  in  connection  with  its  political  im- 
portance. As  towns  approach  the  status  of  real  urban 
centers  it  frequently  becomes  difficult  if  not  impossible 
to  provide  a  meeting  place  large  enough  for  all  qualified 
voters.  But  so  strong  is  the  attachment  of  the  New 
Englanders  to  this  venerable  institution  that  towns  fre- 
quently continue  their  ancient  form  of  direct  democracy 
even  when  it  has  become  practically  unworkable.  Boston, 
for  instance,  did  not  change  from  the  town  government 
to  the  city  form  of  government  until  it  had  attained  a 
population  of  forty  thousand,  with  a  voting  strength  of 
seven  thousand.  Brookline,  Massachusetts,  with  a  pop- 
ulation in  19 10  of  nearly  28,000,  must  have  contained 
about  five  thousand  voters  qualified  to  attend  and  partici- 
pate in  the  town  meeting. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       261 

The  meeting  is  opened  by  the  town  clerk  or  one  of  the 
selectmen  and  the  first  order  of  business  on  the  warrant 
is  the  selection  of  a  moderator,  or  presiding  officer.  This 
position,  which  is  considered  as  the  highest  honor  the  town 
can  bestow,8  is  usually  filled  year  after  year  by  some 
prominent  citizen,  the  position  of  secretary  being  filled 
by  the  town  clerk.  The  next  business  is  the  election  of 
the  town  officers,  of  whom  there  are  a  large  number,  some 
chosen  for  two-  or  three-year  terms,  but  mostly  for  a 
single  year.  The  polling,  which  is  by  secret  ballot,  fre- 
quently continues  while  other  business  of  the  meeting  is 
being  taken  up.  The  business  at  the  annual  meeting  may 
frequently  require  more  than  one  day  for  its  transaction. 

In  the  smaller  towns  this  primary  assembly  really  func- 
tions as  a  direct  democracy  with  actual  participation  by 
a  considerable  number  of  voters.  In  the  larger  towns, 
however,  especially  those  approaching  the  stature  of  citie3, 
the  real  work  of  the  meeting  is  done  by  politicians  or  at 
best  by  a  committee  appointed  by  the  moderator  to  make 
recommendations  on  the  matters  included  in  the  warrant. 
In  either  case  the  active  influence  of  the  individual  voter 
is  more  or  less  negligible,  and  the  direct  democratic  char- 
acter of  the  town  government  is  largely  modified.  In  the 
opinion  of  a  competent  observer,  "  the  town  meeting 
ceases  to  be  a  satisfactory  organ  of  local  government 
when  the  population  of  the  town  exceeds  five  or  six 
thousand."  9 

Not  merely  the  size  of  the  population  but  its  character 
also  may  work  to  undermine  the  traditionally  satisfactory 
character  of  the  New  England  town  meeting  as  a  local 
government  organ.  The  development  of  manufactur- 
ing, bringing  within  a  predominatingly  rural  town  a  con- 

8  Munro,  op.  cit.,  p.  562. 

9  Ibid.,  p.  563. 


262 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 


siderable  industrial  population,  frequently  of  the  foreign 
immigrant  type,  introduces  a  discordant  note,  while  the  in- 
crease in  summer  residents  may  threaten  the  control  by 
the  permanent  residents  of  their  town  affairs,  or  at  least 
gives  rise  to  disputes.10  Under  such  conditions  the  town 
meeting  ceases  to  function  properly  and  the  town  must 
either  give  up  its  cherished  type  of  direct  government  for 
the  representative  type  of  city  government,  or  content  it- 
self with  the  shell  of  the  old  scheme  from  which  the 
spirit  has  largely  departed.  There  is  a  strong  tendency 
to  do  the  latter,  but  an  effort  at  compromise  may  be  seen 
in  the  scheme  of  limited  town  meetings,  so-called,  under 
which  the  voters  elect  in  precincts  representatives  to  at- 
tend the  town  meeting.  This  is  the  scheme  now  in  force 
in  Brookline,  Massachusetts,  but,  as  has  been  pointed  out 
by  Professor  William  B.  Munro,  a  town  meeting  must 
either  be  direct  or  representative,  and  if,  as  in  Brook- 
line,  it  is  constituted  on  the  representative  principle,  it 
has  lost  the  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  historical 
New  England  town  meeting.  There  seems,  therefore,  no 
alternative  in  the  growing  towns  of  New  England  to  the 
gradual  abandonment  of  the  old  town  meeting  system 
wherever  urban  conditions  develop. 

Town  Officers. —  Another  of  the  striking  features  of 
the  New  England  town  government,  aside  from  its  char- 
acter as  a  direct  democracy  is  the  large  number  of  officers 
provided.  In  a  small  New  England  town  of  two  or  three 
thousand  population  there  may  be  a  score  or  more  officers, 
mostly  elected  at  the  town  meeting,  but  in  part  appointed 
by  the  selectmen.  Most  of  these  officers  are  unpaid  and 
the  multiplicity  of  offices  is  necessary  in  order  to  permit 
citizens  to  perform  these  limited  duties  without  undue  in- 
terference with  their  private  affairs.     In  the  early  days 

10  Hart,  Actual  Government,  p.  171. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       263 

service  as  town  officers  was  compulsory  with  penalties  for 
failure  to  serve  and  practically  every  eligible  inhabitant 
was  called  into  service  in  some  capacity  or  other  in  the 
course  of  time,  and  this  is  true  even  to-day  in  the  smaller 
New  England  towns. 

The  Selectmen. —  The  most  important  of  the  town  of- 
ficers are  the  selectmen,  called  in  Rhode  Island  from  an 
early  period  the  town  council.  The  number  of  these 
selectmen  varies  from  three  to  nine,  chosen  usually  for  a 
year  at  a  time,  though  in  Massachusetts  quite  frequently 
for  three  years  with  overlapping  terms.  The  practice  of 
choosing  selectmen  to  carry  on  the  business  of  the  town 
between  town  meetings  began  at  a  very  early  date  in  the 
colonial  towns,  and  their  functions  were  more  important 
then  than  they  are  now,  for  any  business  might  be  assigned 
to  them  by  the  town  meeting,  except  the  election  of  the 
more  important  officers,  and  they  constantly  performed 
most  of  the  town  business,  though  accountable  to  the 
meeting  for  their  acts.11  But  subsequently  their  im- 
portance was  diminished  by  the  requirements  that  the 
more  important  functions  be  performed  by  the  town 
meeting  itself. 

At  present  the  selectmen  have  no  legislative  or  finan- 
cial powers  and  have  largely  lost  their  powers  of  appoint- 
ment. On  the  administrative  side  they  prepare  the  war- 
rants for  the  town  meetings,  are  responsible  for  the  town 
property,  lay  out  highways  and  drains,  issue  certain  li- 
censes, audit  claims  against  the  town  and  issue  warrants 
for  payment,  and  attend  to  the  holding  of  elections,  both 
state  and  local.  They  may  also,  and  in  some  of  the 
smaller  towns  do,  function  as  assessors,  health  officers,  and 
overseers  of  the  poor,  but  in  the  more  important  towns 
there  are  special  boards  chosen  for  these  latter  functions 

11  Howard,  op.  cit.,  pp.  74-88. 


264  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

by  the  town  meeting.  In  Rhode  Island  from  early  colon- 
ial times  the  town  councils,  corresponding  to  the  select- 
men in  the  other  states,  have  exercised  quasi- judicial  func- 
tions in  the  probating  of  wills.  Reelection  to  the  position 
of  selectman  is  quite  common,  sometimes  for  a  consider- 
able number  of  years. 

There  is,  therefore,  no  chief  executive  officer  of  the 
New  England  town,  the  board  of  selectmen  acting  jointly 
and  sharing  the  more  important  administrative  functions 
with  a  varying  number  of  other  independent  boards  and 
officers.  In  colonial  times  the  constable  was  the  consti- 
tutive officer  of  the  town,  but  the  position  has  now  lost 
its  old  importance. 

The  Town  Clerk. —  The  most  important  single  officer  is 
the  town  clerk,  who  is  not  infrequently  the  only  town 
officer  receiving  a  salary.  He  was  in  colonial  times  the 
American  reproduction  of  the  old  vestry  clerk,  as  the 
board  of  selectment  were  the  American  adaptation  of  the 
English  parish  vestry.  He  is  elected,  like  most  of  the 
other  officers,  for  the  term  of  a  year,  but  is  usually  re- 
elected as  long  as  he  is  satisfactory.  The  clerk,  some- 
times called  the  recorder  in  the  early  days,  is  the  secre- 
tary of  the  town  meetings,  of  the  meetings  of  the  board  of 
selectmen,  and  has  charge  of  local  records.  He  is  charged 
with  the  registration  of  births,  marriages,  and  deaths,  an 
ancient  function  dating  back  to  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  He  issues  marriage  licenses  and  in  some 
of  the  states  records  deeds,  mortgages,  and  other  legal  doc- 
uments. He  reports  to  the  town  meeting  on  local  matters 
and  to  state  authorities  on  the  more  general  functions  im- 
posed upon  him  by  state  law. 

The  Tozvn  Treasurer. —  Each  town  has  also  a  treasurer 
who  receives  the  state,  county,  and  local  taxes  and  the 
other  moneys  of  the  town.     He  turns  over  the  county  and 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       265 

state  moneys  to  the  central  officers  and  pays  out  the  town 
moneys  on  orders  approved  by  the  selectmen.  His  ac- 
counts are  submitted  to  the  town  meeting  for  examina- 
tion and  audit. 

The  Town  Constable. —  Another  officer  found  in  ever)' 
town  is  the  ancient  one  of  the  constable,  of  whom  there 
were  commonly  two  or  more,  who  are  the  peace  officers 
of  the  town.  Their  position  is  similar  to  that  of  the 
sheriff  in  the  county,  for  aside  from  preserving  the  peace 
and  arresting  offenders  they  execute  the  warrants  of  the 
selectmen  and  of  the  justices  of  the  peace.  Like  the 
sheriff  in  some  states  too,  the  constables  may  act  as  tax 
collectors.  But  the  position  of  constable  is  relatively  of 
much  less  importance  now  than  in  colonial  times. 

School  Authorities. —  In  every  town  there  is  a  separate 
school  board  or  committee  chosen  by  the  town  meeting, 
membership  being  open  to  women  in  some  states.  Us- 
ually the  direct  administration  of  the  schools  in  the  town 
is  in  the  hands  of  this  committee,  including  the  building 
and  care  of  schools,  the  appointment  of  teachers  and  the 
determination  of  the  curriculum.  Smaller  school  districts 
within  the  towns  were  formerly  common  and  are  even 
now  found  in  a  number  of  the  Connecticut  towns  where 
there  are  locally  elected  trustees  and  district  taxes,  the 
town  committee  acting  as  a  supervisory  body.  But  the 
tendency  has  been  away  from  this  system  and  toward 
greater  centralization  in  the  management  of  schools,  su- 
perintendents sometimes  being  chosen  for  several  towns 
in  common.12  In  none  of  the  New  England  states,  as  has 
been  seen,  are  there  county  school  superintendents  with 
supervisory  powers  over  the  local  authorities,  but  there 
has  been  in  the  New  England  states  as  elsewhere,  a  grad- 
ual tendency  toward  supervision  and  control  by  state  edu- 

12  Fairlie,  op.  cit.,  p.  161. 


266  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

cational  authorities.  Massachusetts  was  in  fact  one  of 
the  earliest  of  the  colonies  to  require  each  town  to  establish 
schools,  and  the  other  colonies  soon  followed. 

Miscellaneous  Officers  and  Boards. —  In  addition  to 
these  officers  regularly  found  in  New  England  towns  there 
are  a  number  of  others,  some  of  which  are  usually  found 
only  in  the  more  important  towns,  a  number  of  which 
however,  though  of  very  secondary  importance,  are  regu- 
larly found  even  in  the  smaller  places.  In  the  first  group 
belong  such  officers  as  the  overseers  of  the  poor,  assessors, 
and  boards  of  health  whose  functions  in  the  smaller  towns 
are  frequently  performed  by  the  selectmen.  Poor  relief 
may  involve  the  management  of  a  town  almshouse  or 
workhouse,  though  several  towns  may  combine  for  this 
purpose,  while  the  tendency  already  noted  to  centralize 
certain  phases  of  charities,  operates  in  New  England 
also  to  reduce  the  relative  impoit.mce  of  this  phase  of 
local  administration  by  the  towns.  The  assessment  of 
property  for  local  and  state  purposes  is  a  function  of  the 
town  selectmen,  of  which  in  the  larger  places,  however, 
they  are  ordinarily  relieved  by  the  election  of  special  as- 
sessors by  the  town  meeting.  The  care  of  the  public 
health  may  also  be  entrusted  to  special  boards  chosen  by 
the  town  meeting,  to  relieve  the  selectmen  of  the  burden 
of  this  responsibility,  and  the  measure  of  state  direction 
and  control  over  this  function  of  the  town  is  also  con- 
tinually increasing. 

Other  special  authorities  found  frequently  in  the  more 
important  towns  include  water  boards,  library  boards, 
park  boards,  and,  in  Massachusetts,  town  planning  boards. 
Special  highway  authorities  are  also  found  as  a  rule  in 
large  and  small  towns  alike  and  their  function  as  local 
officers  is  also  being  circumscribed  by  the  growing  devel- 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       267 

opment  of  state  aid  and  supervision  in  highway  matters 
previously  noted. 

Justices  of  the  peace  are  elected  by  the  towns  in  four 
of  the  New  England  states,  but  they  are  not  regarded 
as  town  officers,  their  judicial  jurisdiction  extending  over 
the  county.  They  do  not  perform  local  administrative 
functions,  though  in  the  three  states  where  the  justices 
are  appointed  by  the  state  authorities  they  may  perform 
marriages. 

The  extensive  list  of  minor  officers  13  found  in  New 
England  towns  is  interesting  chiefly  because  of  their  num- 
ber, their  insignificance,  and  their  three  hundred  years  of 
existence  in  this  country.  It  is  clear  that  this  system  of 
administration  by  unpaid,  unskilled  laymen  can  be  satis- 
factory only  so  long  as  the  insignificant  size  of  the  town 
requires  no  special  fitness  or  undue  amount  of  service. 
In  the  large  towns,  consequently,  the  practice  of  employ- 
ing paid  officials  is  becoming  more  common. 

The  New  England  town  has  an  interesting  and  credit- 
able history  and  in  some  respects  is  still  as  satisfactory 
a  unit  of  local  government  as  the  United  States  can  show. 
But  with  the  increasing  complexity  of  public  functions 
and  the  closer  interrelation  of  localities  with  each  other 
and  with  the  state,  it  would  seem  to  be  rather  too  insignifi- 
cant an  area  for  effective  local  administration  unless  it  has 
attained  the  size  and  importance  of  a  city.  Its  advan- 
tage over  the  county  as  an  area  of  rural  administration  in 
New  England,  lies  chiefly  in  the  fact  that  it  is  a  historical 
division  with  community  feeling  and  traditions,  but  many 
of  its  most  important  functions  in  the  future  such  as  po- 

13  Among  which  may  be  mentioned  poundkeepers,  fence  viewers, 
sealers  of  weights  and  measures,  inspectors  and  weighers  of  various 
kinds,  fish  wardens,  and  hog-reeves. 


268  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

lice  protection,  public  health,  poor  relief,  education,  water 
supply,  sewage  disposal,  etc.,  will  have  to  be  administered 
in  larger  areas.  Possibly  a  transfer  of  local  government 
powers  to  the  counties  or  to  even  larger  divisions  con- 
structed on  the  principle  of  a  federation  of  towns  might 
be  accomplished  that  would  provide  a  more  effective  area 
of  local  government  and  yet  preserve  the  advantages  of 
groups  possessing  community  feeling  and  homogeneity. 

Central  and  Middle  Western  Townships 

It  will  be  remembered  that  in  the  great  central  colonies, 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  there  was  found  a  combina- 
tion of  the  features  of  local  government  exhibited  by  the 
New  England  colonies  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Southern 
colonies  on  the  other.  Towns  in  New  York,  as  has  been 
seen,  antedated  counties,  as  in  New  England,  while  in 
Pennsylvania  counties  were  the  earlier  units  to  be  estab- 
lished. But  in  both  of  these  states  the  town  played  a 
more  important  part  than  in  the  South,  while  some  of  the 
important  functions  entrusted  to  the  New  England  town 
were  in  the  central  colonies  turned  over  to  the  counties. 
Thus  arose  the  so-called  county-township  system  which 
served  as  the  model  for  the  states  erected  out  of  the 
Northwest  Territory,  for  the  Northern  states  immediately 
west  of  the  Mississippi,  and  in  some  measure  for  the 
states  to  the  west  of  these.  Also  it  will  be  remembered 
that  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  represented  the  proto- 
types of  the  two  main  classes  within  the  county-township 
system,  namely  the  "  commissioner  type  "  and  the  "  super- 
visor type,"  the  characteristics  of  which  have  already  been 
discussed.14 

In  the  older  states  of  this  group  the  townships  or  towns, 
as  they  were  at  first  indiscriminately  called,  were  consti- 

14  See  supra,  Chap.  ii. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       269 

tuted  much  like  the  New  England  towns  out  of  irregular 
areas  comprising  considerable  rural  territory,  and  that  is 
characteristic  of  these  townships  to-day.  But  in  the 
states  of  the  Northwest  Territory  and  the  later  Western 
states  the  civil  townships  were  commonly  based  on  the 
areas  of  the  congressional  townships  of  approximately 
six  miles  square  surveyed  under  authority  of  the  Ordi- 
nance of  1785.  In  spite  of  numerous  exceptions  this  may 
be  regarded  as  the  typical  township  from  the  point  of 
view  of  shape  and  area  in  the  Middle  Western  group  of 
states. 

Township  government  in  this  great  group  of  states  has 
been  divided  by  one  recognized  authority,13  into  three 
classes,  measured  from  the  point  of  view  of  its  state  of 
development.  The  first  class  is  represented  by  the  type 
originating  in  Pennsylvania,  influenced  there  to  some 
extent,  by  the  same  forces  that  moulded  the  Southern 
type  of  local  government,  and  adopted  by  such  states 
as  Ohio,  Indiana,  Iowa,  Kansas,  and  Missouri.  This 
illustrates  the  least  developed  type  in  which  the 
people  of  the  townships  possess  indeed  the  essentials  of 
local  self-government,  but  have  no  deliberative  primary 
assembly  corresponding  to  the  New  England  town  meet- 
ing, and  no  representation  as  members  of  the  township  on 
the  county  board.  The  next  class,  represented  by  such 
states  as  Minnesota  and  the  Dakotas  is  characterized  also 
by  the  lack  of  representation  on  the  county  board,  but  is 
differentiated  from  the  first  class  by  the  institution  of  the 
annual  town  meeting  possessing  elective,  limited  local  leg- 
islative powers.  The  third  group,  adopting  the  so-called 
New  York  plan,  represents  the  development  of  the  town- 
ship in  its  most  complete  form  in  which  there  is  not  only 
the  institution  of  the  town  meeting  but  also  representa- 

15  Howard,  op.  cit. 


270  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

tion  on  the  county  board  which  is  made  up  of  the  super- 
visors of  the  townships  within  the  county. 

There  are  several  striking  features  to  be  noted  in  this 
development  of  the  townships  as  subordinate  divisions  of 
the  county.  In  the  first  place  attention  may  be  called  to 
the  parallel  westward  movement  of  the  differing  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania  types,  due,  of  course,  primarily 
to  the  similar  westward  trend  of  the  emigrants  from  the 
older  states  who  carried  with  them  their  attachment  to  the 
local  institutions  with  which  they  were  familiar.  Closely 
connected  with  this  is  the  second  striking  fact,  namely  that 
while  each  state  was  absolutely  free  to  adopt.its  own  local 
institutions,  there  is  such  a  great  similarity,  in  spite  of 
infinite  minor  variations,  in  the  system  of  the  various 
states  that  followed  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  main  orig- 
inal types.  An  illustration  of  the  general  acceptance  of 
recognized  types  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  in  a  num- 
ber of  the  central  Western  states  we  find  the  constitutions 
authorizing  the  adoption  of  "  township  organization " 
for  counties  without  any  further  explanation,  assuming, 
of  course,  that  the  type  of  local  government  designated  by 
that  term  is  indicated  with  sufficient  clearness  thereby. 
Thirdly,  and  also  related  to  a  fact  brought  out  in  the 
first  mentioned  feature,  within  individual  states  we  find 
one  of  the  two  main  types  succeeding  the  other  or  exist- 
ing side  by  side  with  it,  as  a  result  of  the  successive  influ- 
ence of  immigrants  from  different  sections  of  the  country. 
An  illustration  of  the  first  condition  may  be  seen  in  Mich- 
igan where  at  first  the  strong  county  system  was  found, 
followed  later  by  the  establishment  of  townships  and  town 
meetings  and  the  substitution  of  a  county  board  of  su- 
pervisors in  place  of  the  small  boards  of  county  commis- 
sioners. These  later  developments  seem  to  be  definitely 
traceable  to  the  influence  of  the  later  immigration  which 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       271 

was  largely  from  New  England  and  New  York  where  the 
town  or  township  occupied  a  more  important  position. 
An  illustration  of  the  second  situation  where  both  types 
of  county  organization  are  to  be  found  within  a  state, 
owing  to  the  strong  traditions  of  different  portions  of  the 
settlers,  is  furnished  by  Illinois,  where  the  original  South- 
ern, strong  county  organization  was  preferred  by  the  im- 
migrants from  the  South  who  bulked  large  among  the  early 
settlers,  while  the  later  influx  of  Easterners  succeeded  af- 
ter a  bitter  fight  in  incorporating  into  the  constitution  of 
1848  a  provision  allowing  any  county  to  adopt  the  town- 
ship organization,  with  the  result  that  the  latter  form  has 
almost  completely  supplanted  the  earlier  type.  The  same 
development  occurred  in  Missouri  for  similar  reasons, 
where,  however,  relatively  few  of  the  counties  have 
adopted  the  township  organization.  On  the  other  hand, 
in  Nebraska,  where  the  optional  plan  also  prevails,  the  con- 
sideration of  sources  of  population  seems  to  have  little 
importance,  the  desire  for  the  township  system  being  ap- 
parently due  to  economic  considerations.  Finally  it  is 
to  be  noted  that  in  Minnesota  and  Dakota  Territory  con- 
gressional townships  within  the  counties  with  a  minimum 
number  of  voters  were  given  the  right  to  adopt  the  town- 
ship laws,  though  Minnesota  and  South  Dakota  now  have 
the  township  system  while  North  Dakota  has  the  op- 
tional system  under  its  constitution. 

Townships  in  the  territory  now  under  consideration  are, 
like  the  New  England  towns,  essentially  rural  in  nature. 
But  the  greatest  variations  exist  not  merely  in  the  number 
of  inhabitants  but  in  the  character  of  their  population 
when  classified  as  urban  and  rural.  This  is  due  in  large 
part  to  the  variations  that  exist  in  the  different  states  as  to 
whether  the  incorporated  urban  communities,  cities,  bor- 
oughs, and  villages  are  or  are  not  included  within  the 


-7- 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 


township  for  governmental  purposes.  Cities  are  gener- 
ally separated  off  from  the  townships  in  which  they  lay 
before  incorporation,  though  in  an  important  group  of 
states,  including  Illinois  and  Indiana,  all  incorporated 
communities,  including  cities,  remain  within  the  township. 
As  a  result,  in  these  states  there  are  townships  with  pop- 
ulations running  into  the  thousands,  or  in  one  or  two  in- 
stances even  into  the  hundreds  of  thousands.  In  other 
states,  as  in  Pennsylvania,  for  instance,  the  boroughs  are 
also  quite  independent  of  the  townships,  while  in  still 
others  incorporated  villages  as  well  are  distinct  from  the 
counties  in  which  they  lie. 

Even,  however,  when  the  incorporated  urban  communi- 
ties are  not  separated  from  the  townships,  it  is  true  in  all 
the  states  that  these  specially  incorporated  places,  of  which 
there  are  thousands,  perform  within  their  limits  by  means 
of  their  own  officers  many  of  the  more  important  local 
governmental  functions.  As  compared  with  the  New 
England  town,  therefore,  which,  as  has  been  seen,  nor- 
mally includes  all  territory  both  urban  and  rural  that  has 
not  been  specially  incorporated  as  a  city,  the  townships 
for  the  most  part  suffer  a  curtailment  of  their  functions 
from  within,  while,  owing  to  the  greater  importance  ac- 
corded to  the  county  as  an  agency  of  local  rural  adminis- 
tration, the  townships  are  more  restricted  in  the  other  di- 
rection than  the  New  England  town.  This  results,  of 
course,  in  the  township  constituting  in  general  a  much 
less  important  area  of  local  government  in-  the  states  op- 
erating under  this  system  than  the  town  in  New  England. 

Townships  are  local  public  corporations  by  legislative 
grant  with  the  usual  corporate  powers,  as  to  suing  and 
being  sued  as  corporations^  the  acquisition,  holding,  and 
disposal  of  property,  the  making  of  contracts  in  the  execu- 
tion of  their  legal  powers,  etc.     They  have  not,  however, 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       273 

any  inherent  or  inalienable  powers,  though  in  a  number 
of  states  there  are  constitutional  restrictions  prohibiting 
local  or  special  legislation  for  the  incorporation  of  town- 
ships, the  alteration  of  their  boundaries,  or  the  determina- 
tion of  their  powers.  But  the  extent  of  legal  legislative 
powers  and  the  scope  of  undertakings  for  which  they  are 
authorized  to  levy  taxes  are  in  general  so  limited  that  they 
are  to  be  regarded  as  quasi-corporations  rather  than  mu- 
nicipal corporations.10  On  the  other  hand  the  townships 
are  charged  by  the  state  with  the  performance  of  central 
functions  such  as  the  assessment  and  collection  of  taxes 
for  the  counties  and  the  state,  serving  as  election  districts 
for  state  and  county  officers,  and  the  petty  administration 
of  justice. 

The  insignificance  of  the  township  as  a  local  government 
area  in  Illinois,  where,  as  has  been  seen,  there  was  a  de- 
termined fight  waged  for  its  establishment,  may  be  seen 
from  the  conclusions  of  a  recent  investigation  made  in 
that  state.17 

Towns  in  Illinois  have  very  limited  powers.  They  are  vested 
with  corporate  capacity,  and  may  levy  local  taxes  and  make  by- 
laws for  a  few  enumerated  purposes.  .  .  .  They  also  elect  a 
considerable  number  of  officials  for  road  and  judicial  admin- 
istration and  for  the  assessment  and  collection  of  taxes.  But 
the  matters  which  form  the  important  business  of  New  England 
towns  are  in  Illinois  looked  after  by  the  cities,  villages,  and 
school  districts.  .  .  .  Town  finances  are  of  very  slight  im- 
portance. The  road  and  bridge  tax  is  separately  administered; 
and  the  general  town  levy  is  usually  not  more  than  two  or  three 
per  cent  of  the  total  taxes,  and  averages  less  than  six  cents  on 
the  $100  of  taxable  value.     The  principal  expenditures  are  for 

19  For  the  accepted  distinction  between  these  two  terms  see  supra, 
pp.  187  ff. 

17  See  Fairlie,  "  County  and  Town  Government  in  Illinois,"  Annals 
of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  dnd  Social  Science,  May. 
1913,  PP-  70  ff. 


274  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  assessment  of  property  for  taxation  and  the  compensation 
of  town  officers. 

In  other  states  the  township  has  even  more  limited  func- 
tions, as  in  New  York,  for  instance,  where  even  the  town 
taxes  are  levied  by  the  county  board. 

The  Town  Meeting. —  On  the  organization  side  the 
township  system  in  the  states  under  consideration  may  be 
classified,  in  the  first  place,  on  the  basis  of  the  existence  or 
non-existence  of  the  town  meeting.  The  states  in  which 
the  town  meeting  is  found  are  those,  as  has  been  pointed 
out,  in  which  the  settlers  were  principally  from  New  York 
and  the  New  England  states.18  But  while  the  establish- 
ment of  the  institution  of  the  town  meeting  in  these  states 
illustrates  the  influence  of  governmental  traditions,  the 
actual  character  of  the  town  meeting  as  found  in  them 
demonstrates,  on  the  other  hand,  how  a  governmental  in- 
stitution transplanted  into  different  political,  social,  and 
economic  conditions  will  inevitably  display  variations  from 
the  original,  due  to  the  altered  conditions.  So  the  orig- 
inal idea  of  the  part  the  town  meeting  should  play  in 
these  Western  townships  was  probably  based  on  the  New 
England  town  meeting,  though  in  New  York  as  has  been 
seen,  town  government  was,  even  in  colonial  days,  repre- 
sentative rather  than  direct,  in  spite  of  the  existence  of 
town  meetings.  But  the  town  meeting  of  the  Western 
states  for  the  most  part  seems  to  show  a  distinctly  less 
vigorous  existence  than  in  New  England,  as  evidenced  by 
the  remarkably  small  attendance  at  town  meetings  in 
most  of  these  states,  compared  with  the  situation  in  New 
England,  a  mere  handful  of  voters  often  constituting  the 
whole  attendance  out  of  voting  populations  running  into 
the  hundreds  or  even  into  the  thousands,  while  in  a  con- 

18  Michigan,    Illinois,    Wisconsin,    Minnesota,    Nebraska,   and    the 
Dakotas. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       275 

siderable  number  of  the  townships  no  town  meeting  is 
held,  although  established  by  law.  To  illustrate  again 
from  the  investigation  of  conditions  in  Illinois  already 
cited,19  ".  .  .  Less  than  a  third  of  these  (i.  e.  of  the 
towns  answering  inquiries  as  to  the  attendance  at  town 
meetings  in  191 2)  reported  an  attendance  of  more  than 
fifty  at  the  business  meeting ;  and  only  thirty-nine  towns 
reported  an  attendance  of  more  than  a  hundred.  In 
towns,  including  cities  of  some  size,  the  town  meeting  is 
of  even  less  importance  than  in  rural  towns ;  it  is  seldom 
attended  by  more  than  a  handful  of  voters,  and  in  some 
places  no  meeting  at  all  is  held.  Nearly  three-fourths  of 
the  county  officers  who  replied  to  inquiries  as  to  the  value 
of  town  meetings  reported  that  they  were  no  longer  of 
substantial  service.  .  .  .  Many  urged  the  abolition  of  the 
town  meeting." 

Similar  conditions  are  reported  from  other  states,  al- 
though in  some  states  the  town  meeting  seems  to  be  more 
vigorous  as  a  rule  and  in  individual  towns  in  Illinois 
greater  interest  is  shown  in  the  town  meetings.  But  in 
view  of  the  apparent  decadence  of  the  town  meeting,  as 
shown  in  the  experience  of  various  states,  one  can  hardly 
subscribe  to  the  opinion  of  an  early  student  of  the  town- 
ship in  the  Western  states  that  the  county-township  sys- 
tem based  on  the  dual  principles  of  the  town  meeting  and 
the  county  board  composed  of  representatives  of  the 
towns,  "  seems  to  be  one  of  the  most  perfect  products  of 
the  English  mind  and  worthy  to  become.  ...  the  pre- 
vailing type  in  the  United  States."  20 

In  the  other  states  of  the  section  here  under  considera- 
tion, those  influenced  by  the  Pennsylvania  model,  the  town- 


19  Fairlie,  "  County  and  Town  Government  in   Illinois,"  etc.,  pp. 

71.  72. 
2°  Howard,  op.  cit.,  p.  158. 


276  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ship  is  found,  it  is  true,  but  not  the  town  meeting.  This  is 
not  surprising,  however,  since  town  meetings  were  orig- 
inally not  provided  for  in  Pennsylvania  at  the  time  when 
towns  were  established. 

The  reasons  for  the  relative  debility  of  the  town  meet- 
ing in  the  central  West  are  not  hard  to  find.  In  the  first 
place,  the  Western  township  was  an  arbitrary  area  based 
on  a  rectangular  survey  having  no  homogeneity  or  geo- 
graphic or  social  interests,  and  there  were  no  forces  at 
work  to  create  a  community  feeling.  It  has  been  seen 
how  the  success  of  the  New  England  town  meeting  as  an 
instrument  of  government  is  being  endangered  in  spite 
of  its  three  centuries  of  history,  by  the  introduction  of 
new  and  conflicting  elements  in  the  population.  The 
Western  township,  lacking  the  historical  traditions,  suf- 
fered from  the  outset  from  the  disintegrating  forces  aris- 
ing from  unrelated  and  of  times  conflicting  economic  in- 
terests of  the  growing  population,  while  the  addition  of 
elements  in  the  population  unacquainted  with  the  instru- 
ments of  direct  democracy  contributed  in  a  correspond- 
ingly stronger  degree  in  the  West  than  in  New  England  to 
the  decay  of  the  town  meeting.  In  all  of  these  Western 
states,  furthermore,  as  urban  and  semi-urban  communities 
developed  within  the  township  their  special  needs  were 
given  recognition  by  their  special  incorporation  as  cities 
and  villages,  distinct,  as  has  been  seen,  in  general  from  the 
original  township,  or  in  any  case  performing  for  them- 
selves many  of  the  functions  which  in  New  England  con- 
stituted the  major  portion  of  the  town-meeting  business. 
With  virtually  no  business  of  importance  to  transact,  the 
town  meeting  ceased  to  attract  attendance,  until  the  town- 
ship officers  frequently  were  the  only  persons  enough  con- 
cerned to  appear,  with  the  result  that  while  the  form  of 
the  town  meeting  remained,  the  substance  largely  departed. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       277 

Under  these  circumstances,  therefore,  it  would  seem 
better  to  abandon  the  empty  form  and  adopt  a  frankly 
representative  type  of  government,  if  indeed  the  town- 
ship performs  any  useful  function  at  all  under  present 
day  conditions.21 

Township  Officers. —  From  the  point  of  view  of  the 
administrative  organization  of  the  township,  two  pretty 
distinct  types  again  may  be  noted  in  the  states  under  con- 
sideration. In  some  states  the  chief  administrative  au- 
thority is  a  committee  or  board,  not  unlike  the  New  Eng- 
land board  of  selectmen,  though  in  most  of  them  this  is 
a  relatively  more  important  body  than  the  latter  because 
this  type  of  organization  is  more  generally  found  in  the 
states  that  do  not  have  the  town  meeting.  On  the  other 
hand  in  states  like  New  York,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin, 
where  the  town  meeting  exists,  there  is  a  chief  administra- 
tive officer  known  as  the  supervisor,  or  chairman,  an  of- 
ficial whose  absence  in  the  New  England  town  has  been 
remarked  above.  In  the  states  where  the  supervisor  sys- 
tem of  county  organization  has  been  adopted,  this  official 
acquires  added  importance  because  he  is  the  representative 
of  the  township  on  the  county  board.  But  even  in  the 
states  operating  under  the  commissioner  system  in  which 
the  townships  as  such  are  not  represented,  as  in  Indiana, 
the  township  trustee,  as  he  is  there  called,  is  a  distinctly 
outstanding  official.  But  in  addition  there  is  also  a  town- 
ship board. 

The  duties  of  the  township  supervisors,  chairmen,  or 
trustees,  are  so  varied  in  the  different  states  as  to  defy 
detailed  and  separate  enumeration.  But  quite  generally 
they  are  the  legal  representatives  of  the  township,  are  re- 
sponsible for  township  property  and  usually  administer 
the  finances  of  the  township.     Other  administrative  duties 

21  See  below,  p.  282. 


278  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

are  frequently  imposed  upon  them  such  as  the  assessment 
of  property  for  taxation,  and  the  care  of  the  poor. 

The  township  board  in  the  townships  possessing  such 
a  chief  administrative  officer  are  commonly  composed  of 
this  officer  and  the  other  township  officers,  but  in  those 
townships  for  which  no  chief  administrative  officer  is 
established,  the  board  as  a  rule  is  composed  of  elective 
officials  distinct  from  the  other  county  officers.  In  some 
states  they  are  called  supervisors,  without  being  members 
of  the  county  board,  however. 

The  powers  of  these  boards  vary  as  much  as  those  of 
the  chief  officers,  but  one  general  function  seems  to  be  to 
audit  the  accounts  of  the  township  officers  and  to  author- 
ize the  payment  of  funds  from  the  treasury.  Not  infre- 
quently, however,  these  boards  are  the  real  governing 
body,  even  where,  as  in  New  York,  a  town  meeting  is  pro- 
vided for.  And  where  there  is  no  chief  administrative 
officer,  these  boards  may  unite  almost  all  township  func- 
tions, legislative,  financial,  and  administrative  in  their 
own  hands. 

Other  township  officers  frequently  found  include  the 
township  clerk,  township  assessors,  treasurers,  overseers 
of  the  poor,  and  others.  These  officers  are  elected  and 
receive  salaries  and  the  large  number  of  minor  unpaid 
posts  found  in  the  New  England  towns  are  not  dupli- 
cated here. 

In  the  assessment  of  property  the  township  is  frequently 
subject  to  control  by  county  authorities,  while  poor  relief 
is  usually  a  county  function.  Public  health  has  been  made 
a  township  function  in  various  states,  but  road  construc- 
tion and  repair  are  frequently  entrusted  to  officers  elected 
for  road  districts  within  the  county. 

Two  or  more  justices  of  the  peace  are  elected  by  the 
townships  throughout  these  states  but  while  they  com- 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY      279 

monly  act  only  for  the  townships  in  which  they  are  elected, 
legally  their  jurisdiction  extends  through  the  county. 
This  system  is  subject  to  grave  abuses  22  and  has  led  to 
their  jurisdiction  being  limited  to  their  townships  in  some 
states.  The  only  connection,  however,  between  the  jus- 
tices of  the  peace  and  the  administration  of  local  town- 
ship affairs  is  to  be  found  in  a  few  states  like  New  York 
and  Illinois,  where  they  are  members  of  the  town  boards. 
This  is  about  the  only  survival,  however,  in  the  central 
group  of  states  of  the  former  administrative  attributes  of 
the  justices  of  the  peace. 

Finally,  there  are  two  or  more  constables  in  each  town- 
ship who  act  as  conservators  of  the  peace  and  as  executive 
officers  of  the  justice  courts,  occupying  much  the  same 
position  as  the  constables  in  New  England  towns. 

Township  Functions. —  One  of  the  ancient  functions 
of  the  New  England  town  and  one  in  which  there  has  al- 
ways been  a  great  deal  of  popular  interest  manifested  in 
the  United  States,  has  not  been  entrusted  in  the  states  hav- 
ing township  organization  to  the  townships  as  such.  That 
function  is  the  local  administration  of  the  public  schools. 
Public  elementary  education  in  these  states  is  in  the  care 
of  special  school  districts,  which  are  constituted  as  special 
corporations,  with  their  own  voters,  usually  including  wo- 
men even  before  1920  —  as  was  true,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, of  the  participation  of  voters  in  school  matters  in 
New  England  electing  their  own  officers,  and  having  their 
own  taxing  powers.  Here  we  find  a  recurrence  of  the 
idea  of  the  primary  assembly  in  the  school  meetings, 
which  are  found  not  only  in  the  states  having  town  meet- 
ings but  also  in  some  of  those  not  adopting  the  primary 
meeting  for  the  management  of  town  affairs. 

Although   these    school   districts    are    legally    distinct 

22  See  Baldwin,  The  American  Judiciary,  pp.  129-131. 


280  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

bodies  from  the  townships  they  usually  stand  in  a  rather 
definite  geographical  relation  to  the  latter.     Thus  they 
are  usually  identical  in  area  with  or  are  subdivisions  of 
the  township.     This  similarity  of  geographical  extent  is 
the  result  of  historical  development.     It  has  been  pointed 
out  that  in  a  number  of  the  Middle  Western  states  the 
Federal  Government  insisted  on  the  continuation  of  the 
practice  of  setting  aside  a  section  of  land  within  each 
congressional  township  for   free  public-school  purposes 
by  the  states  on  admission  to  statehood.     Thus  before 
there  were  townships  for  other  local  government  purposes, 
the  congressional  township,  which  was  in  large  part  the 
direct  antecedent  of  the  civil  township,  had  been  indicated 
as  an  area  of  school  administration.     Thus  in  some  of  the 
states,  Illinois  for  instance,  the  township  was  a  body  poli- 
tic and  corporate  for  school  purposes  before  it  was  estab- 
lished for  any  other  governmental  purposes.     When  later 
these  congressional  townships  were  made  election  districts, 
justices  and  constable  districts,  road  districts  and  poor- 
relief  districts,  the  identity  of  area  was  established.     But 
the  legally  distinct  character  of  the  school  district  was 
maintained,  and  when  the  population  began  to  require 
schools  but  was  not  sufficiently  dense  to  make  the  whole 
township  a  single  school  district,  smaller  areas  within 
the  township  were  created   for  school  purposes.     With 
the  increase  in  population,  however,  and  the  fuller  devel- 
opment of  educational  ideas  which  would  naturally  point 
to  larger  areas  of  school  administration  as  desirable,  the 
smaller  districts  were  still  retained. 

It  seems  clear,  as  has  been  pointed  out  before,  that 
petty  school  districts  with  few  pupils  and  a  teacher  or  two 
are  ineffective  and  wasteful,  and  that  except  in  the  incor- 
porated urban  communities  the  area  of  administration 
should  be  larger  than  the  insignificant  rural  districts  still 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       281 

found  in  a  number  of  these  states.  With  the  development 
of  passable  roads  it  is  very  generally  recognized  that 
larger  districts,  even  though  necessitating  public  transpor- 
tation facilities  for  pupils,  are  in  every  way  preferable 
to  the  feeble,  little  school  districts  formerly  so  common. 
Accordingly  within  recent  years  there  has  been  a  tendency 
towards  consolidation  of  districts  and  uniting  all  the  rural 
area  of  the  township  in  one  district.  Where  that  is  done 
there  would  seem  to  be  no  good  reason  for  having  a  town- 
ship school  corporation  distinct  from  the  ordinary  town- 
ship government.  But  it  seems  at  least  doubtful  whether 
even  the  township  represents  a  sufficiently  extensive  area 
for  purposes  of  school  administration.  The  centralizing 
tendencies  in  state  educational  administration  would  seem 
to  call  for  a  good  deal  more  consolidation  than  is  possible 
under  such  a  system,  and  expert  opinion  among  educators 
seems  to  point  to  the  conclusion  that  the  county  should 
take  the  place  of  the  township  in  these  states  as  the  primary 
unit  of  local  school  administration.23 

School  districts  are  not,  however,  the  only  special  local 
districts  to  be  found  within  or  cutting  into  the  townships, 
aside  from  cities,  villages,  and  boroughs.  Drainage  dis- 
tricts, levee  districts,  and  other  improvement  districts  of 
various  kinds  are  to  be  found  in  various  states,  still  fur- 
ther diminishing  the  importance  of  the  township.  This 
tendency  to  create  special  districts  is  due  partly  to  the  fact 
that  the  geometrical  boundaries  of  the  townships  do  not 
correspond  to  the  areas  in  which  special  needs  develop,  and 
partly  also  to  the  fact  that  the  extremely  limited  financial 
and  administrative  powers  of  these  areas  do  not  permit 
of  new  and  costly  undertakings.  But  the  multiplication 
of  local  governmental  agencies  with  independent  taxing 

23  See  Cubberly  and  Elliott,  State  and  County  School  Administra- 
tion. 


282  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

power  is  resulting  in  introducing  worse  confusion  into 
our  already  unmanageable  system.  We  are  repeating  in 
this  country  the  experience  of  England  during  the  most  of 
the  nineteenth  century  when  the  multiplication  and  con- 
fusion of  local  areas  became  so  fearful  that  even  the  tra- 
ditional British  aversion  to  radical  and  sweeping  altera- 
tion broke  down  before  the  need  of  simplification,  and 
resulted  in  the  reforms  of  1888  and  1894.  A  striking 
example  of  the  situation  which  may  develop  as  a  result  of 
this  tendency  to  multiply  special  areas  instead  of  centraliz- 
ing powers  and  duties  in  a  single  organization  is  furnished 
by  the  situation  in  Cook  County  and  Chicago,  Illinois. 
Within  the  city  of  Chicago  there  are  no  less  than  thirty- 
eight  distinct  local  governments,  while  in  the  county  as  a 
whole  there  are  393  separate  agencies  of  local  govern- 
ment.24 This  is,  of  course,  an  extreme  case,  but  many  of 
the  factors  that  contributed  to  the  hopelessly  muddled  sit- 
uation there  are  at  work  to  bring  about  similar  results 
elsewhere,  not  merely  in  the  group  of  states  immediately 
under  consideration  here,  but  in  all  parts  of  the  country. 
We  are  justified,  therefore,  in  touching  briefly  here  upon 
the  question  of  whether  the  township  as  it  has  been  de- 
scribed above,  fills  any  essential  place  in  a  proper  scheme 
of  local  government  at  all,  or  whether  it  would  not  be 
better  to  abolish  it  entirely  and  adopt  areas  more  fitted 
to  the  local  governmental  needs  of  the  states.  The  main 
functions  of  the  townships  at  present,  bearing  in  mind  the 
fact  that  local  urban  needs  are  generally  met  by  munici- 
pal corporations  largely  distinct  from  the  townships,  are 
the  original  rural  activities  of  poor  relief,  and  highways, 
in  addition  to  functions  of  a  distinctly  central  character 

24  See  Bulletin  No.  n,  "Local  Governments  in  Chicago  and  Cook 
County,"  prepared  by  the  Illinois  Legislative  Reference  Bureau  for 
the  Constitutional  Convention. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       283 

such  as  justice,  the  assessment  of  taxes,  and  the  conduct 
of  elections.  Education,  as  has  been  seen,  is  not  a  func- 
tion of  the  civil  townships  as  such  anyway  in  these  states. 
Now  these  are  all  functions  which  are  not  really  suitable 
for  local  administration  in  these  areas  at  all,  even  if  a  sat- 
isfactory system  of  state  administrative  control  should 
be  developed.  Poor  relief,  aside  from  the  temporary 
non-institutional  cases,  can  manifestly  not  be  carried  on 
in  any  such  insignificant  area  as  is  the  township  from  the 
point  of  view  of  population  and  resources,  since,  as  has 
been  seen,  experience  is  proving  that  even  the  average 
county  is  not  adapted  to  the  provision  and  maintenance 
of  special  institutions  for  the  various  classes  of  public 
dependents.  Highway  problems  are  in  the  same  degree 
manifestly  not  primarily  the  problems  of  restricted  rural 
areas  of  some  thirty  odd  square  miles,  but  are  increasingly 
matters  of  state  and  even  national  concern.  The  county, 
as  has  been  pointed  out,  cannot  be  left  to  neglect  the  man- 
agement of  the  main  arteries  of  traffic  that  run  through  it, 
but  must  be  forced  to  contribute  to  their  proper  construc- 
tion and  maintenance  with  the  aid  and  under  the  direction 
of  the  state  highway  authorities,  if  the  larger  interests  of 
the  state  are  not  to  suffer.  In  a  like  manner  the  secondary 
roads  within  the  county  cannot  be  left  to  the  mercies  of 
particularistic  and  impotent  divisions,  like  the  petty  road 
districts,  without  the  greatest  loss  of  efficiency  and  in- 
crease of  expense.  Public  health,  in  a  similar  manner, 
requires  expensive  personnel  and  equipment  for  its  ef- 
ficient protection,  and  a  larger  area  demanding  full-time, 
professional  administrators  will  obviously  be  better  taken 
care  of  than  a  limited  area  in  which  the  system  of  part- 
time  officials  will  inevitably  be  adopted.  Similarly  as  an 
area  of  assessment  for  taxes  the  township  has  demon- 
strated its  incapacity. 


284  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Not  only,  therefore,  do  we  find  that  the  township  is  as 
a  matter  of  fact  a  governmental  area  that  deals  with  so 
few  matters  as  to  furnish  insufficient  basis  for  popular 
interest,  resulting  in  even  those  few  matters  being  im- 
perfectly or  corruptly  managed,  but  also  we  may  con- 
clude that  the  township  is  in  its  very  nature  not  adapted 
to  the  proper  performance  of  the  functions  it  now  pos- 
sesses or  that  might  be  conferred  upon  it.  The  solution, 
therefore,  would  seem  to  lie  in  the  abolition  of  the  town- 
ship in  these  states  as  a  unit  of  local  government,  and  the 
distribution  of  its  existing  functions,  including  the  ad- 
ministration of  schools  which  is  carried  on  by  the  school 
districts  in  or  of  the  townships,  between  the  urban  munici- 
palities on  the  one  hand  and  the  county  or  other  larger 
areas  on  the  other. 

County  Divisions  in  the  Southern  and  Western 

States 

County  Subdivisions  in  the  South. —  Towns  in  New 
England  preceded  the  counties  and  continued  to  perform 
functions  of  local  government  after  the  counties  were 
superimposed  upon  them.  Townships  were  established 
in  the  central  and  middle  western  states  after  the  estab- 
lishment of  counties,  partly  as  a  result  of  the  governmental 
traditions  of  the  settlers,  partly  in  consequence  of  the 
division  of  the  land  into  congressional  townships  by  act 
of  the  Continental  Congress,  and  partly  because  condi- 
tions in  the  newer  states  somewhat  similar  to  those  orig- 
inally found  in  the  central  states  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard 
seemed  to  call  for  like  local  institutions.  But  in  the 
Southern  states,  the  parish,  principally  an  ecclesiastical 
division  and  never  of  great  importance  as  a  local  govern- 
ment unit,  did  not  survive  the  introduction  of  the  county 
system  of  administration,  which  was  more  suited  to  the 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       285 

economic,  social,  and  political  conditions  of  that  part  of 
the  country. 

Nor  did  the  subsequent  political  and  social  develop- 
ment of  that  section  require  any  departure  from  the  or- 
iginal system  in  which  the  county  was  the  primary  unit  of 
local  administration.  With  the  creation  of  urban  com- 
munities, these  were  commonly  incorporated  as  villages, 
towns,  or  cities,  as  occurred  in  the  other  states,  but  the 
characteristics  of  the  rural  areas  were  not  greatly  altered 
during  the  nineteenth  century.  Population,  that  is  es- 
pecially the  voting  population,  remained  sparse,  for  it  was 
never  within  the  mind  of  the  lawmakers  and  controlling 
forces  in  those  states  that  the  negroes  who  constituted  the 
bulk  of  the  rural  population  in  a  number  of  the  states 
should  be  admitted  to  political  participation,  the  Fifteenth 
Amendment  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  Land  con- 
tinued to  be  held  in  large  tracts,  and  those  tenant  farmers 
who  were  not  negroes  were  as  a  rule  more  or  less  transi- 
tory, frequently  ignorant,  generally  indifferent  on  political 
matters,  and  sometimes  under  the  political  domination 
of  their  landlords. 

There  was,  therefore,  nothing  to  call  for  the  introduc- 
tion of  rural  areas  of  local  government  smaller  than  the 
county,  and  the  attempt  already  noted  of  some  of  the  re- 
construction governments  to  introduce  the  Northern  town- 
ship system  into  the  Southern  states  would  probably  have 
failed  even  without  the  bitter  antagonism  that  was  created 
in  the  South  towards  all  Yankee  institutions  and  ideas  by 
the  experiences  of  the  Reconstruction  Period. 

But  while  subdivisions  of  the  county  corresponding 
to  the  New  England  town  or  the  New  York  township  did 
not  find  a  place  in  the  South,  counties  were  divided  for 
administrative  and  political  convenience  into  lesser  areas. 
The  more  important  of  these  appear  under  a  variety  of 


286  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

names  such  as  magisterial  districts  in  Virginia,  super- 
visors' districts  in  Mississippi,  wards  in  Louisiana,  com- 
missioners' precincts  in  Texas,  militia  districts  in  Georgia, 
hundreds  in  Delaware,  and  quite  commonly  election 
precincts  or  districts.  As  these  divisions  have  either  no 
local  administrative  powers  of  their  own  at  all,  or  have 
them  to  a  very  limited  extent  only,  they  commonly  include 
the  incorporated  villages,  towns,  and  cities  within  their 
geographical  boundaries.  In  Virginia,  however,  where, 
as  has  been  seen,  the  cities  are  distinct  from  the  counties 
even,  they  are  not  within  any  magisterial  districts,  while 
New  Orleans  and  a  few  other  cities  in  other  states  are 
likewise  excluded. 

In  most  of  the  Southern  states  these  districts  are  elec- 
tion and  judicial  districts  purely,  though  in  a  few  in- 
stances they  are  also  road  districts.  They  are  of  the  most 
importance  in  Virginia,  but  even  there  do  not  approach 
the  northern  town  or  township  in  organization  or  func- 
tions. Justices  of  the  peace  are  commonly  elected  in 
these  districts,  and  in  the  states  where  the  justices  are 
still  members  of  the  county  board,25  they  constitute  local 
officers  of  some  importance.  Generally,  however,  the 
justices  of  the  peace  occupy  much  the  same  position  in 
the  South  that  they  do  in  the  North.  In  one  or  two  states 
they  are  still  appointed  by  the  Governor. 

Special  districts  with  local  taxing  powers  are  found  in 
the  Southern  states  as  well  as  in  the  North,  sometimes 
with  their  own  elective  officers  but  more  commonly  using 
at  least  some  of  the  county  officers.  These  comprise  such 
districts  as  drainage  districts,  health  districts,  road  dis- 
tricts, levee  districts,  etc.,  and  may  cut  across  county  lines 
as  well  as  across  the  lines  of  the  election  and  judicial  dis- 
tricts already  noted. 

25  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  and  Arkansas. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       287 

For  school  purposes  the  Southern  states  had  not  con- 
venient areas  like  the  New  England  towns  or  the  Middle 
Western  townships,  and  the  counties  were  for  the  most 
part  unsuited  as  areas  of  school  administration  also.  In 
fact  the  provision  of  free  public  schools  in  the  Southern 
states  lagged  behind  those  provided  in  the  North,  partly 
because  the  school  population  was  for  a  long  time  very 
sparse,  the  landowners  sending  their  children  to  private 
schools  or  educating  them  at  home,  and  the  negroes  not 
being  regarded  as  having  any  claim  to  free  public  edu- 
cation. Partly,  also,  the  cost  of  public  schools  proved 
a  considerable  financial  burden.  With  the  growth  of  rural 
population,  however,  special  school  districts  were  provided 
within  the  counties,  but  with  the  exception  of  the  incor- 
porated urban  areas,  these  were  more  closely  united  with 
the  county  organization  than  in  the  North.  Then,  too, 
as  the  obligation  to  provide  free  schools  for  the  negroes 
came  to  be  recognized,  the  importance  of  school  adminis- 
tration increased.  But  the  inefficient  and  wasteful  char- 
acter of  school  administration  by  petty  one-school,  and 
sometimes  one-teacher  districts,  made  itself  felt  in  the 
South  as  elsewhere,  and  the  traditional  plan  of  recognizing 
the  county  as  the  chief  administrative  subdivision  tended 
to  make  the  decentralization  less  complete  there.  As  has 
already  been  pointed  out,  the  introduction  and  extension 
of  state  administrative  control  over  education,  has  become 
a  factor  of  recent  years  in  the  Southern  states  also.  In- 
corporated cities,  towns,  and  villages  are  commonly  con- 
stituted independent  school  districts,  though  in  some  in- 
stances even  city  schools  are  united  with  the  rural  schools 
under  one  county  administrative  authority. 

If  it  is  true,  as  has  been  suggested,  that  the  New  Eng- 
land town  and  the  central  western  township  are  filling 
a  place  of  diminishing  value  as  local  government  areas,  it 


288  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

is  extremely  unlikely  that  a  corresponding  subdivision 
will  develop  in  the  South  where  neither  historical  tradi- 
tions nor  geographical,  economic,  and  social  conditions 
are  favorable  to  such  development.  Truly  urban  problems 
will  continue  to  be  met  by  the  incorporation  of  urban 
areas,  and  the  problems  of  rural  government  that  are  left 
must  either  be  entrusted  to  the  county,  which  in  the  older 
Southern  states  at  least,  has  some  traditions  back  of  it 
and  elements  of  local  patriotism  and  pride,  or  to  an  even 
larger  unit  which  will  be  financially  able  to  support  more 
intensive  and  effective  administration,  while  at  the  same 
time  being  of  sufficient  geographical  extent  to  control 
the  conditions  affecting  the  safety,  health,  and  welfare  of 
the  inhabitants. 

County  Subdivisions  in  the  West. —  In  the  West  also 
conditions  were  not  favorable  to  the  development  of  the 
town  or  township  system.  It  is  true  that  in  all  of  the 
states  of  the  West,  township  organization  is  contemplated 
or  prescribed  by  the  constitutions.26  In  four  of  these 
states  the  constitutional  provisions  regarding  the  estab- 
lishment by  the  legislature  of  township  organization  are 
repetitions  of  the  Illinois  provision  permitting  local  county 
option  on  the  adoption  of  township  organization,  while  in 
other  states,  Nevada  for  instance,  the  provision  is  man- 
datory in  form  that  the  legislature  shall  establish  a  sys- 
tem of  county  and  township  government  which  shall  be 
uniform  throughout  the  state. 

But  these  provisions,  the  incorporation  of  which  into 
the  constitutions  was  undoubtedly  due,  in  part  at  least, 
to  the  influence  of  the  settlers  who  had  a  previous  acquain- 
tance with  such  a  system,  did  not  suffice  to  bring  into  ac- 

26  California,  XI,  4;  Colorado,  XIV,  12;  Idaho,  XVIII,  6;  Mon- 
tana, XVI,  6;  Nevada,  IV,  25;  Oregon,  VI,  8;  Utah,  XI,  4;  Wash- 
ington, XI,  4;  Wyoming,  XII,  4. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       289 

tual  being  the  township  of  the  Middle  West,  because  of 
the  differing  conditions.  In  the  first  place,  just  as  the 
isolated  and  scattered  nature  of  the  early  farming  popula- 
tion of  the  states  in  the  Northwest  Territory  differed  fun- 
damentally from  the  characteristic  mode  of  settlement  in 
group  communities  in  New  England  and  was  unfav- 
orable to  the  development  of  as  strong  a  township  govern- 
ment, so  in  many  of  the  Far  Western  states,  where  the 
occupation  of  the  early  settlers  was  cattle  raising  instead 
of  farming,  a  form  of  occupation  dictated  in  large  part 
by  the  character  of  the  land  itself  as  well  as  by  its  re- 
moteness and  requiring  much  larger  tracts  of  land  and 
so  an  even  more  scattered  population,  the  township  as  ex- 
isting in  the  Middle  Western  states  was  not  a  practicable 
unit  of  local  rural  government.  In  those  states  the  county 
inevitably  became  not  only  the  chief  but  in  many  cases  the 
only  unit  of  local  government,  until  urban  settlements  be- 
gan to  develop.  In  other  states,  where  early  settlement 
was  the  result  of  the  discovery  of  gold  and  other  minerals, 
population  was  almost  wholly  gathered  in  the  mining 
camps  which  immediately  partook  of  the  nature  of  urban 
units,  the  rural  territory  having  in  many  states  almost  no 
population  at  the  time  of  their  admission  to  statehood. 
Although  greatly  modified  by  the  subsequent  influx  of 
agricultural  populations,  the  situation  is  still  very  much 
the  same  to-day,  and  with  the  practice  of  incorporating 
the  smallest  compact  settlements  there  really  developed 
neither  a  need  for  nor  a  possibility  of  a  system  of  rural 
government  based  on  smaller  units  than  the  county.  The 
latter,  as  has  been  seen,  has  been  continually  reduced  in 
area  as  the  population  increased,  for  even  the  average 
sized  county  as  existing  in  the  older  states  comprised  too 
small  a  population  for  many  years  in  these  sparsely  settled 
states  to  be  organized  as  a  governmental  area. 


290  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Thus,  while  the  township  exists  by  law  in  some  of  these 
states,  it  is  geographically  a  much  larger  area  than  the 
Middle  Western  township  and  in  its  character  approaches 
much  more  the  districts  or  precincts  found  in  the  South. 
These  districts  are  principally  judicial,  election,  road,  or 
school  districts.  Justices  of  the  peace  and  constables  are 
elected  in  the  townships  or  precincts  and  election  officers 
are  usually  found  for  the  same  areas. 

The  county  board  itself  commonly  has  the  power  to 
create  school  and  road  districts.  The  former  usually  have 
their  own  elected  boards  which  in  some  states  have  their 
own  taxing  power,  though  even  that  is  sometimes  exercised 
by  the  county  boards.  In  the  same  way  road  districts 
are  usually  under  the  supervision  of  members  of  the 
county  board,  with  district  overseers  appointed  by  the 
same  body,  though  in  a  few  cases  elected,  the  tendency 
apparently  being  in  the  latter  direction. 

There  are  also  found  some  other  special  districts  in 
these  Western  states,  such  as  irrigation  districts.  The 
incorporated  urban  communities  commonly  remain  parts 
of  the  townships  or  precincts,  although  performing  their 
local  functions  independently. 

Throughout  this  region,  therefore,  conditions  do  not 
point  to  the  development  of  the  township  as  a  vital  unit  of 
local  government,  even  with  the  increase  in  density  and 
change  in  character  of  the  later  population. 

Semi-Urban  Subdivisions  of  Counties 

In  the  discussion  of  the  county  subdivisions  so  far,  at- 
tention has  been  devoted  to  the  typically  rural  areas. 
It  is  true,  as  has  been  pointed  out,  that  frequently  the  New 
England  towns  and  in  some  cases  the  Middle  Western 
townships  attain  a  semi-urban  or  even  urban  character. 
But  even  those  types  of   county   subdivisions  are  pre- 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       291 

dominatingly  rural,  while  the  county  districts  in  the  rest 
of  the  United  States  are  virtually  wholly  so.  It  was 
also  pointed  out  that  in  every  part  of  the  country,  with 
the  exception  of  New  England,  compact  communities 
within  the  counties  are  almost  always  authorized  to  or- 
ganize as  special  corporations,  and  that  this  tendency  is 
manifest  not  only  in  the  Middle  Western  states  where 
township  government  is  generally  provided,  but  even 
in  recent  times  to  an  increasing  extent  in  New  England. 

These  communities  are  distinguishable  on  the  one  hand 
from  the  class  of  county  divisions  so  far  considered  by 
the  fact  that  they  are  created  to  satisfy  the  needs  of  a 
greater  or  less  number  of  persons  living  within  a  rela- 
tively restricted  area.  On  the  other  hand  they  are  dis- 
tinguishable from  the  larger  urban  areas  commonly  desig- 
nated as  cities  by  their  smaller  size,  and  a  correspondingly 
more  limited  range  of  functions  and  less  complicated  or- 
ganization. 

Generally  these  semi-urban  divisions  are  known  as  vil- 
lages, boroughs,  or  towns.  But  the  name  given  them  is 
no  criterion  of  their  real  nature,  for  so-called  towns,  vil- 
lages, or  boroughs  may  vary  in  population  from  a  hun- 
dred inhabitants  to  ten  or  fifteen  thousand  or  more,  while 
the  term  city  is  applicable  in  some  states  to  communities 
of  two  thousand,  or  less.  Perhaps  five  thousand  may  be 
taken  as  a  fair  average  figure  at  which  these  communities 
leave  the  semi -urban  class  and  enter  the  class  commonly 
known  as  cities.  But  for  purposes  of  discussion  it  may 
be  better  to  adopt  the  classification  of  the  United  States 
Census  which  regards  all  places  of  2,500  inhabitants  or 
more  as  urban,  and  all  districts  of  less  than  2,500  as  rural. 

According  to  the  Census  of  1910  there  were  14,576  in- 
corporated places  in  all.  Of  these  11,784,  or  more  than 
71  per  cent,  were  incorporated  places  of  less  than  2,500  in- 


292  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

habitants,  which  comprised  the  vast  majority  of  the  semi- 
urban  subdivisions  we  are  now  considering.  The  number 
of  these  small  corporations  increased  in  the  decade  from 
1900  to  19 10  by  nearly  three  thousand  and  in  the  previous 
decade  by  more  than  twenty-four  hundred,  making  a  total 
increase  since  1890  of  5,318,  while  the  number  of  places 
of  more  than  2,500  showed  an  increase  of  only  895  in 
the  same  period.  But  the  total  population  of  the  semi- 
urban  communities  amounted  in  19 10  to  only  a  little  over 
eight  million,  making  an  average  population  for  these 
places  of  less  than  700. 

We  have  already  seen  in  a  previous  chapter  that  while 
there  were  no  urban  communities  incorporated  in  New 
England  during  the  colonial  period,  the  town  government 
being  considered  suitable  to  care  for  the  needs  of  the  more 
compact  communities  as  well  as  of  the  strictly  rural  por- 
tions of  their  territorial  extent,  small  urban  communities 
were  incorporated  in  a  number  of  the  other  colonies  under 
the  name  of  boroughs  or  cities  even  prior  to  the  Revolu- 
tion. The  term  borough  was  retained  in  some  of  these 
states  for  the  smaller  communities,  while  in  others  the 
term  village  was  used,  the  designation  city  usually  being 
applied  after  the  Revolution  to  the  more  important  cor- 
porations. With  the  establishment  of  settlements  in  the 
Western  states  the  term  town  came  into  use  to  designate 
these  smaller  urban  places,  and  sometimes  both  village 
and  town  were  employed  in  the  same  state,  villages  desig- 
nating the  smallest  units  separately  incorporated,  while 
towns  represented  a  more  important  area  classified  be- 
tween the  village  and  the  city,  corresponding  to  boroughs 
in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania. 

The  remarkable  increase  in  the  number  of  these  small 
municipalities  was  undoubtedly  due,  in  the  Middle  West- 
ern and  Middle  Atlantic  states,  to  the  artificial  nature 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       293 

and  relatively  feeble  character  of  the  township,  while 
in  the  South  and  the  West  it  was  necessitated  by  the  ab- 
sence of  any  local  government  unit  smaller  than  the 
county.  In  New  England  the  noticeable  development 
of  such  corporations  has  been  very  recent,  the  ancient 
town  government  being  regarded  as  adequate  until  condi- 
tions require  the  incorporation  of  large  urban  commun- 
ities as  cities. 

One  characteristic  of  these  newer  urban  corporations 
as  compared  with  the  older  towns  and  townships  is  that 
the  former  are  incorporated  by  voluntary  acts  of  the 
inhabitants,  while  the  latter  were  not  only  originally 
not  regarded  as  corporations  at  all  but  even  after  the 
corporate  capacity  was  conferred  upon  them  their  or- 
ganization was  quite  commonly  brought  about  by  a  gen- 
eral law  applying  to  all  existing  or  proposed  divisions 
without  reference  to  local  desires.  This  distinction, 
however,  which  as  has  been  seen  elsewhere,  has  generally 
been  regarded  as  marking  the  dividing  line  between  muni- 
cipal corporations  and  gmw-corporations,  is  no  longer 
strictly  adhered  to.  In  the  states  in  which  the  question 
of  township  organization  was  to  be  decided  by  vote  of 
the  county,  there  was,  of  course,  a  measure  of  local  de- 
sire presupposed,  but  only  in  one  or  two  instances  did 
the  state  laws  leave  it  to  the  decisions  of  the  inhabitants 
of  parts  of  counties  to  decide  when  they  wanted  to  be  or- 
ganized as  townships. 

The  common  method  for  the  incorporation  of  -these 
semi-urban  communities  is  by  petition  of  a  certain  num- 
ber of  the  voters  of  an  area  which  has  the  requisite  pop- 
ulation, to  the  county  judicial  or  administrative  authori- 
ties. Usually  an  affirmative  majority  vote  is  then 
required,  for  completion  of  the  project,  though  in  some 
instances  the  county  authorities  may  grant  the  petition 


294  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

for  organization  as  a  corporate  town  or  village  without 
such  vote.  Not  infrequently,  too,  in  order  to  insure 
compactness  of  population  as  well  as  attainment  of  a 
given  minimum,  the  law  specifies  that  the  population 
which  it  is  intended  to  include  within  a  new  corporation 
must  be  contained  in  a  definitely  limited  area,  such  as  a 
square  mile. 

In  more  than  one-half  of  the  states,  there  are  consti- 
tutional provisions  requiring  the  incorporation  of  towns 
to  be  regulated  by  general  law,  strengthened  in  a  number 
of  the  states  by  express  prohibitions  on  special  or  local 
laws  for  the  incorporation  of  towns.  But  nine  state 
constitutions  expressly  permit  classification  of  towns  on 
the  basis  of  population,  only  one  of  these  27  fixing  the 
population  limits  for  each  class.  In  the  other  states, 
under  the  prevailing  judicial  opinions,  classification  can 
be  resorted  to  in  spite  of  the  prohibition  of  special  laws, 
which  when  carried  to  extremes  may  nullify  the  prohibi- 
tions of  the  constitution. 

The  corporate  character  of  these  subdivisions  involves 
not  only  the  usual  corporate  attributes  of  suability, 
acquiring,  holding,  and  disposing  of  property,  perpetual 
succession,  etc.,  and  the  further  powers  of  taxation,  and 
borrowing  money  for  corporate  purposes,  but  also  gen- 
erally a  local  ordinance  power  for  the  preservation  of 
public  safety,  health,  and  morals,  and  to  a  greater  ex- 
tent than  is  true  of  the  townships,  or  even  counties,  the 
power  to  undertake  public  utilities.  Generally  speaking, 
the  extent  of  the  functions  performed  by  these  incor- 
porated villages  and  towns  varies  inversely  with  the  im- 
portance of  the  larger  county  subdivisions,  being  least 
extensive  in  New  England  and  most  important  in  the 
South  and  West.     A  very  common  constitutional  limita- 

27  Kentucky. 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       295 

tion  upon  the  powers  which  the  legislature  may  grant  to 
the  corporations  in  question  is  that  prohibiting  the  town 
from  subscribing  to  or  becoming  a  shareholder  in  cor- 
porations, or  appropriating  or  loaning  any  public  moneys 
to  such  private  undertakings.  Furthermore,  there  are 
constitutional  limitations  in  most  states  both  on  the 
amount  of  taxes  that  can  be  levied,  usually  described 
as  so  much  per  hundred  dollars  of  taxable  value,  and  on 
the  total  amount  of  indebtedness  to  be  incurred,  com- 
monly designated  as  a  certain  per  cent  of  the  assessed 
property  valuations.  Of  course,  in  accordance  with  the 
general  principles  of  the  law  of  municipal  corporations  in 
the  United  States,  villages  and  towns  may  only  levy  taxes 
of  a  kind  and  to  an  amount,  or  borrow  money  to  an  ex- 
tent specified  by  law. 

Villages  and  towns  are  commonly  organized  with  an 
elective  council  or  board  of  trustees,  holding  office  for 
short  terms,  usually  one  or  two  years.  These  councils  or 
boards  are  the  financial  and  legislative  authorities  of  the 
villages  and  towns,  and  in  many  instances  exercise  im- 
portant administrative  powers  also,  such  as  the  control 
of  the  property,  the  creation  of  minor  offices,  and  the  ap- 
pointment of  their  incumbents,  though  certain  of  the  local 
officers,  notably  the  principal  officer,  are  frequently  es- 
tablished by  law  and  chosen  by  popular  election. 

On  the  organization  side  one  of  the  characteristics  of 
these  corporations,  as  compared  with  the  other  county  di- 
visions, is  the  very  general  existence  of  a  chief  officer.  In 
a  number  of  the  states  he  is  called  the  mayor,  in  imita- 
tion of  the  chief  officer  in  cities.  But  other  titles  are 
also  found,  the  commonest  one  being  president.  This 
officer  is  elected  by  popular  vote  and  though  in  many 
cases  he  is  not  accorded  by  law  any  position  of  legal  su- 
periority he  is  recognized  as  the  most  important  per- 


296  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

sonage  and  his  influence  is  likely  to  be  greater  than  that 
of  the  members  of  the  council  or  board.  It  is  true  that 
in  some  states  there  is  only  a  chairman  of  the  board, 
chosen  by  the  board  itself  and  not  assuming  the  impor- 
tance of  an  executive  head,  but  the  tendency  is  rather  to 
accord  to  the  village  president  or  town  mayor  a  position 
approaching  that  of  the  city  executives  with  a  veto  power, 
a  general  police  responsibility,  and  administrative  super- 
vision and  direction  over  the  other  officers. 

These  small  corporations  usually  have  their  own  con- 
stables and  justices  of  the  peace.  There  is  always  a 
recording  officer  or  clerk  and  a  financial  officer  to  col- 
lect and  disburse  the  moneys.  Even  assessors  may  be 
found  among  the  village  and  town  officers,  though  com- 
monly the  county  or  township  assessors  function  in  that 
capacity.  These  officers,  and  others  that  are  required 
by  law  in  some  states  are  frequently  elective,  though 
generally  appointed  by  the  council  or  board.  Naturally 
the  number  of  officers  required  will  vary  with  the  popu- 
lation, and  a  special  law,  or  laws  for  classes  of  towns  ac- 
cording to  population,  make  provisions  for  additional  of- 
ficers in  the  larger  communities,  but  sometimes  the  mini- 
mum machinery  required  is  cumbersome  for  the  smallest 
of  these  corporations. 

These  semi-urban  areas  are  frequently  established  as 
independent  school  districts,  in  which  case  there  are 
school  boards  required,  as  a  rule  chosen  by  popular  vote. 

But  the  corporate  affairs  of  the  villages  and  towns  as 
school  districts  are  generally  distinct  from  the  other  local 
concerns.  This  tendency  to  make  education  a  branch  of 
administration  wholly  independent  of  and  in  large  meas- 
ure unrelated  to  the  general  administrative  organization, 
runs  through  the  entire  American  scheme  of  govern- 
ment, state  and  local.     It  is  reflected  in  the  popularly 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       297 

elected  state  superintendent,  in  the  independently  elected 
county  boards  and  superintendents,  in  the  system  of  petty 
school  districts  with  their  own  machinery,  in  these  semi- 
urban  local  corporations,  and,  as  will  be  seen,  in  the  cities 
as  well.  It  may  be  called,  therefore,  the  traditional 
American  type  of  school  administration.  As  to  its  the- 
oretical soundness  and  practical  aspects  something  will 
be  said  at  a  later  place.  It  may  be  remarked,  here,  how- 
ever, that  public-school  administrators  and  trained  edu- 
cators seem  to  be  pretty  generally  convinced  of  its  wis- 
dom. At  the  same  time,  it  may  be  permissible  to  sug- 
gest at  this  point  that  the  objective  value  of  this 
conviction  may  be  somewhat  impaired  by  the  very  in- 
timate relation  in  which  the  judges  stand  to  the  system 
itself. 

Summary  and  Conclusions  as  to  County  Divisions. 
—  Surveying  the  situation  that  exists  in  the  United 
States  as  a  whole  with  regard  to  the  subdivisions 
of  counties,  we  find  first,  that  where  rural  subdi- 
visions with  somewhat  general  powers  of  local  gov- 
ernment exist,  they  are  historical  continuations  or 
perpetuations  of  ancient  institutions,  as  in  New  Eng- 
land and  the  central  states.  In  the  second  place, 
where  historical  and  traditional  influences  did  not  oper- 
ate to  call  such  agencies  of  rural  local  government  within 
the  county  into  existence  they  have  not  been  created. 
In  the  third  place,  the  long  established  rural  town  and 
township  government  of  New  England  and  the  central 
and  Middle  Western  states  have  been  and  are  being  under- 
mined by  the  development  of  urban  and  semi-urban  com- 
munities within  their  limits  which  seem  to  demand  a 
separate  corporate  existence,  leaving  the  functions  of 
these  traditional  units  of  decreasing  importance  and  pub- 
lic interest.     In  the  fourth  place,  in  every  part  of  the 


LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

country,  though  less  in  New  England  than  elsewhere, 
even  the  smallest  compact  settlements  have  been  accorded 
by  separate  establishment  as  local  corporations,  a  recogni- 
tion of  individual  local  problems  which  neither  the  general 
rural  subdivisions  of  the  county  where  they  existed,  nor 
the  county  itself  where  there  are  no  such  divisions,  were 
regarded  as  competent  to  handle.  And,  finally,  that  in 
addition  to  these  authorities  for  general  local  govern- 
mental purposes,  an  increasing  number  of  special  districts 
have  been  created  as  local  corporations  for  particular  pur- 
poses, such  as  road  building,  school  administration,  health 
administration,  fire  protection,  and  the  provision  of  public 
services  such  as  water  supply,  drainage,  sewerage,  irriga- 
tion, and  other  public  improvements.  These  special  dis- 
tricts need  not,  and  often  do  not,  even  coincide  in  area 
with  existing  divisions. 

The  growth  in  number,  size,  and  powers  of  the  larger 
urban  areas  known  generally  as  cities,  is  another  signifi- 
cant factor  which  will  be  considered  more  in  detail  in  the 
next  two  chapters.  But  the  conclusions  that  may  be 
drawn  from  the  existing  situation  with  regard  to  the  sub- 
divisions so  far  considered  seem  to  be  first,  that  there 
is  needless  duplication  and  complexity  of  these  areas; 
second,  that  subdivisions  of  counties  for  general  gov- 
ernmental purposes  seem  to  be  ineffective  and  unnecessary 
save  as  regards  urban  purposes;  and  third  that  the  solu- 
tion of  the  objections  presented  by  both  of  the  forego- 
ing conditions  would  seem  to  lie  in  making  the  county,  or 
an  even  larger  unit,  the  primary  area  for  the  general  ad- 
ministration of  these  public  concerns,  with  the  exception 
of  truly  urban  problems  presented  by  the  larger  municipal- 
ities. The  general  governmental  needs  of  all  the  rural 
and  semi-urban  territory  within  the  county  could  be  more 
effectively  handled  by  the  larger  unit,  while  the  special 
needs  for  public  improvements,  such  as  streets,  sewers, 


SUBDIVISIONS  OF  THE  COUNTY       299 

drains,  levees,  irrigation  facilities,  water  supply,  school 
buildings  and  other  public  works,  experienced  by  special 
sections  of  the  county  could  be  met  by  the  expedient  of 
special  assessments  levied  by  the  county  against  the  prop- 
erty benefited  by  these  improvements,  as  is  done  so  ex- 
tensively in  the  case  of  cities,  to  be  considered  later.  In 
this  way  the  county  would  become  a  vital  and  interest 
arousing  area  of  local  government,  while  petty,  overlap- 
ping, and  sometimes  conflicting  minor  jurisdictions  would 
be  eliminated. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  CITY  GOVERNMENT  * 

General  Characteristics  of  the  City. —  The  term  city, 
as  indicated  in  the  preceding  chapter,  has  no  definite 
or  universal  meaning  in  the  United  States,  so  far  as  the 
question  of  size  is  concerned.  In  some  states,2  as  has 
been  seen,  the  term  is  legally  applicable  only  to  places  of 
10,000  inhabitants  or  more.  In  other  states,  such  as 
Oklahoma,  for  example,  municipal  corporations  with  a 
population  of  2,000  or  more  are  recognized  as  cities,  and 
the  minimum  population  of  cities,  as  distinguished  from 
the  smaller  urban  corporations  considered  in  the  last 
chapter  generally  lies  between  those  extremes  in  the  var- 
ious states.     From  this  point  of  view,  5,000  would  rep- 

1  The  best  and  most  recent  general  treatment  of  the  organization 
of  American  city  government  will  be  found  in  Munro,  The  Gov- 
ernment of  American  Cities,  third  edition  (New  York,  1920). 
Briefer  treatments,  will  be  found  in  other  works  on  American  city 
government,  such  as  Beard,  American  City  Government  (New 
York,  1912)  ;  Goodnow,  City  Government  in  the  United  States 
(New  York,  1004)  ;  Deming,  The  Government  of  American  Cities 
(New  York,  1909)  ;  Wilcox,  The  American  City  (New  York,  1904). 
Still  briefer  treatments  may  be  found  in  the  standard  textbooks 
on  American  government,  such  as  Bryce,  The  American  Common- 
wealth, revised,  edition  (New  York,  1910),  Chap.  1;  Beard,  Amer- 
ican Government  and  Politics,  third  edition  (New  York,  1920),  Chap, 
xxvii;  Munro,  The  Government  of  the  United  States  (New  York, 
1919),  Chap.  xli.  References  to  special  aspects  of  the  general  topic 
of  municipal  organization  will  be  given  at  the  appropriate  place  in  the 
text.  Hatton,  Digest  of  City  Charters  (Chicago,  1906),  though  now 
out  of  date,  contains  a  valuable  compilation  of  the  charter  provi- 
sions of  the  leading  cities  at  that  time.  Exhaustive  references  to 
the  various  topics  discussed  in  this  chapter  will  be  found  in  Munro, 
Bibliography  of  Municipal  Government  (Cambridge,  1915). 

2  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  for  instance. 

300 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      301 

resent  a  fair  mean  minimum  population  for  the  class  of 
urban  corporations  to  be  considered  herein,  although,  as 
has  been  noted,  the  United  States  Census  now  includes  all 
incorporated  places  of  more  than  2,500  population  in 
the  statistics  of  urban  territory.  For-  our  purposes  then 
we  may  regard  as  cities  those  general  urban  corporations 
which  begin  in  population  where  the  lesser  corporations 
leave  off,  always  remembering  that  this  varies  from  state 
to  state  and  that  even  within  a  single  state  there  may  be 
villages,  boroughs,  or  incorporated  towns  larger  than  the 
minimum  population  prescribed  for  cities. 

We  have  seen  in  the  chapter  on  the  development  of 
local  government  in  the  United  States  that  already  in 
colonial  times  there  were,  except  in  New  England,  a  spe- 
cial class  of  urban  corporations  known  commonly  as  bor- 
roughs,  in  imitation  of  their  English  prototypes,  and  that 
some  of  these  were  even  called  cities.  New  York  was 
known  as  a  city  while  still  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Dutch,  as  early  as  1653,  and  retained  that  name  after 
the  conquest  by  the  English,  and  Philadelphia  received  a 
charter  as  a  city  in  1691.  New  Jersey  had  five  incor- 
porated cities  in  colonial  times  as  well  as  two  boroughs, 
but  there  seems  to  have  been  no  legal  distinction  between 
the  two  classes  of  corporations.  A  few  cities  were  found 
in  some  of  the  other  colonies,  but  generally  they  were 
designated  as  boroughs  in  the  charters.3  At  the  time  of 
the  Revolutionary  War  there  were  only  five  municipal 
corporations  with  a  population  in  excess  of  8,000,  and 
even  these  averaged  less  than  20,000,  their  combined  pop- 
ulation being  less  than  three  per  cent  of  the  total  popula- 
tion of  the  colonies.  After  the  Revolution,  the  term  city 
came  quite  generally  to  be  applied  to  the  larger  places 
that  were  incorporated  by  the  legislatures. 

3  See  Fairlie,  Essays  in  Municipal  Administration,  Chap.  iv. 


302  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

A  striking  feature  of  the  development  of  cities  in  the 
United  States  has  been  the  steady  increase  not  merely  in 
the  number  of  cities,  but  in  the  size  of  the  larger  ones,  and, 
most  significant  of  all  perhaps,  in  the  proportion  of  the 
country's  population  that  live  in  these  more  srictly  urban 
communities.  In  1820  the  number  of  urban  corporations 
with  populations  of  more  than  8,000  had  increased  to 
only  thirteen  and  comprised  less  than  five  per  cent  of  the 
total  population.  But  in  19 10  the  number  of  such  places 
had  risen  to  778  and  contained  over  38  per  cent  of  the 
country's  inhabitants.4  If  the  ratio  of  increase  in  the 
decade  from  19 10  to  1920  remains  the  same  as  in  the  ten 
years  from  1900  to  1910,  and  all  indications  seem  to 
point  to  the  conclusion  that  it  will  at  least  have  been 
maintained,  if  not  exceeded,  the  number  of  places  with 
more  than  8,000  inhabitants  will  in  1920  have  mounted 
to  more  than  a  thousand,  while  the  apparently  smaller 
increase  in  rural  population  in  the  same  decade  will  tend 
to  bring  the  ratio  of  the  total  population  living  in  such 
communities  near  the  50  per  cent  mark.  In  the  same  way 
the  number  of  large  cities,  those  with  a  population  of 
100,000  or  more  increased  from  one  in  1820  to  fifty  in 
1 9 10,  and  to  sixty-eight  in  1920.  As  late  as  1890  there 
were  only  four  cities  in  the  United  States  with  more  than 
half  a  million  population.  In  1920  the  number  of  such 
cities  had  reached  twelve,  with  several  others  approaching 
that  figure. 

Nor  has  this  development  been  restricted  to  any  one 
part  of  the  country.  While  in  respect  to  all  three  of  the 
factors  considered  above,  namely  the  number  of  cities, 
their  size,  and  the  degree  of  urban  concentration  there  are 
very  marked  differences  in  the  various  sections  of  the 
country,  all  parts  of  the  country  have  reflected  the  same 

4  Munro,  The  Government  of  the  United  States,  p.  572  note. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      303 

general  tendency  of  a  marked  development  in  all  of  these 
respects. 

Another  general  characteristic  of  cities  that  is  worthy 
of  note,  is  to  be  found  in  certain  peculiarities  of  urban 
populations  as  compared  with  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  country,  some  of  which  are  clearly  of  some  signi- 
ficance in  their  bearing  on  the  problems  of  urban  local 
government.  Chief  among  these  characteristics  may  be 
mentioned  the  preponderance  of  renters  as  compared  with 
home  owners,  the  lack  of  a  community  or  similarity  of 
economic  interests  and  of  neighborliness,  the  congregation 
of  colonies  of  alien  immigrants,  the  greater  per  capita 
earning  power  of  the  city  populations,  and  the  superior 
opportunities  for  organization  and  for  the  dissemination 
of  doctrines  and  theories.  All  of  these  factors,  besides 
others  that  might  be  mentioned,  tend  to  make  cities  the 
centers  of  unrest  and  the  breeding  places  of  radicalism, 
while  the  rural  populations  as  a  rule  cling  to  the  conserva- 
tive attitudes. 

Boroughs  and  cities  were  originally  chartered  by  the 
governors  in  the  colonies,  in  conformity  with  the  plan  of 
borough  charters  granted  by  the  crown  in  England.  The 
grant  of  powers  through  the  instrument  known  as  a 
charter  was,  as  already  noted,  a  feature  that  distinguished 
the  boroughs  from  other  local  government  areas  in  the 
colonies  as  well  as  in  England  and  which  has  continued 
characteristic  of  cities  in  many  states  of  the  Union  to-day. 
But  after  the  Revolution  charters  came  to  be  granted  by 
the  legislatures  instead  of  by  the  governors,  a  change  of 
procedure  that  on  the  one  hand  emphasized  the  shifting 
of  governmental  powers  from  the  executive  to  the  legisla- 
ture in  the  state  constitutions,  and  on  the  other  resulted  in 
the  cities  being  the  mere  possessors  of  statutory  organ- 
ization and  powers  instead  of  the  grantees  of  vested  rights 


3o4  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

which  could  not  be  modified  except  by  judicial  action. 
The  doctrine  that  corporate  charters  are  contracts  not  sub- 
ject to  impairment  under  the  Federal  and  state  constitu- 
tions has  never  been  extended  to  include  the  charters  of 
municipal  corporations,  which  are  considered  absolutely 
subject  to  legislative  amendment  or  repeal  except  so  far  as 
expressly  protected  by  other  provisions  of  the  constitu- 
tions.5 

Finally,  it  is  still  a  general  characteristic  of  cities,  that 
their  creation  and  organization  is  based  on,  although  not 
legally  limited  to,  the  desire  of  the  local  electors,  as  evi- 
denced by  a  petition  for  incorporation,  although  changes 
in  the  charters  have  very  commonly  been  made  without 
reference  to  local  desires,  a  point  that  will  be  considered 
hereafter. 

The  Basis  of  City  Organization. —  The  city  charter 
is,  as  has  been  noted,  a  distinguishing  characteristic  of  this 
type  of  local  government.  It  is  in  fact  the  basic  law  or 
constitution  under  which  the  city  is  organized  and  operates. 
It  determines  both  the  governmental  organization  and  the 
powers  and  duties  of  the  corporation  and  its  agencies. 
We  are  here  concerned  only  with  the  matter  of  organiza- 
tion, as  the  question  of  powers  and  duties  will  be  examined 
in  the  discussion  of  the  functions  of  city  government,  but 
many  of  the  observations  here  made  will  be  seen  to  apply 
obviously  to  the  matter  of  powers  also.  From  the  point 
of  view  of  the  manner  of  granting  charters  to  cities  five 
fairly  distinct  methods  are  distinguishable  among  the 
varying  practices  of  the  states. 

Special  Charter  System. —  The  first  method  to  be  con- 
sidered is  that  of  special  charters  enacted  for  each  com- 
munity as  it  applied  for  incorporation  as  a  city.  This 
was  the  method  followed  in  colonial  times  and  continued  to 

5  See  below,  pp.  358  ff. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      305 

be  the  rule  throughout  the  United  States  until  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  so  that  up  to  that  time  each  city 
could  usually  point  to  a  document  known  as  its  charter, 
which  prescribed  its  organization  and  powers.  Under  this 
system,  which  is  still  in  effect  in  various  states  of  the 
Union,  local  needs  and  local  desires  could  be  considered 
and  the  diversity  of  local  conditions  could  be  given  recog- 
nition in  different  charter  provisions.  Gradually,  how- 
ever, with  the  growth  of  political  party  organization  and 
especially  with  the  development  of  the  spoils  system  the 
power  of  the  legislature  to  deal  separately  with  each  mu- 
nicipality came  to  be  subject  to  the  most  serious  abuses. 
The  dominant  political  faction  in  the  state  government 
frequently  employed  this  power  to  control  the  personnel 
of  the  city  administration,  as  well  as  to  direct  the  impor- 
tant functions  of  awarding  contracts  and  granting  fran- 
chises in  the  city  streets,  and  in  other  ways  to  the  detri- 
ment of  the  city.  These  abuses  led  to  constitutional  limi- 
tations on  the  power  of  legislatures  over  the  incorpora- 
tion and  charters  of  cities  which  resulted  in  the  other  meth- 
ods of  creating  and  adopting  charters  referred  to  above. 
General  Charter  System. —  The  first  instance  of  a  con- 
stitutional provision  imposing  general  limitations  on  the 
power  of  the  legislature  in  incorporating  cities  is  to  be 
found  in  the  Ohio  Constitution  of  1 85 1 .6  There  had  been 
earlier  instances  of  constitutional  limitations  on  specific 
aspects  of  legislative  control  it  is  true,7  but  this  was  the 

6  This  discussion  of  the  constitutional  limitations  imposed  upon 
the  legislatures  in  their  power  over  city  organization  is  based  largely 
on  the  excellent  treatment  of  the  subject  to  be  found  in  McBain, 
The  Law  and  Practice  of  Municipal  Home  Rule  (New  York,  1916). 

7  The  Louisiana  Constitution  of  1812  assured  to  the  citizens  of 
New  Orleans  the  right  of  selecting  their  own  municipal  officers 
instead  of  having  them,  especially  the  mayor,  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor. The  New  York  Constitution  of  1821  similarly  provided  for 
the  local  instead  of  central  appointment  of  the  mayor,  and  the  Con- 


3o6  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

origin  of  the  general  prohibition  on  special  legislation  with 
regard  to  local  corporations  that  came  to  be  so  commonly 
inserted  in  subsequent  constitutions.  The  Ohio  provision 
prohibited  special  acts  conferring  corporate  powers  and 
required  the  general  assembly  to  provide  for  the  organiza- 
tion of  cities  and  incorporated  villages  by  general  law. 
This,  as  Professor  McBain  has  pointed  out,  was  appar- 
ently not  directed  against  specific  abuses  by  the  legislature 
of  its  power  to  incorporate  by  special  charter,  but  was 
merely  the  extension  of  the  principle  of  prohibiting  special 
charters  for  private  corporations,  .a  principle  based  on  ser- 
ious abuses  and  which  had  already  found  expression  in  the 
constitutions  of  various  other  states.  In  those  other 
states,  however,  municipal  corporations  had  not  been  in- 
cluded in  the  prohibition.  Ohio  was  followed  in  the  ex- 
tension of  the  constitutional  prohibition  against  special 
laws  to  cities  by  a  number  of  other  states  in  the  next 
twenty  years,8  in  none  of  which,  however,  do  they  seem  to 
have  been  called  forth  by  specific  abuses  of  the  power  of 
incorporation  by  special  charter.  In  Illinois,  however,  in 
1870  this  prohibition  was  inserted  in  the  constitution  to 
guard  against  a  definite  legislative  abuse  of  dealing  with 
individual  cities,  and  since  that  date  the  general  prohibition 

stitution  of  1846  applied  the  principle  of  local  selection  to  all  city 
officers.  Similar  provisions  were  inserted  in  the  constitutions  of 
Wisconsin  (1848),  Virginia  (1850),  Michigan  (1850),  and  Ken- 
tucky (1850).  'But  these  provisions  seem  hardly  to  have  been  aimed 
at  correcting  abuses  practiced  by  the  legislature  over  the  official 
organization  of  cities  but  were,  rather,  a  mere  expression  of  the 
generally  accepted  theory  that  local  officers  should  be  locally  chosen. 
A  serious  abuse  of  the  power  to  establish  central  commissions  over 
cities  did  develop,  however,  and  led  to  further  limitations  that  will 
be  considered  farther  on. 

8  Indiana  (1851),  Iowa  (1857),  Kansas  (1859),  Nevada  (1864), 
Nebraska  (1867),  Arkansas  (1868),  Tennessee  (1870),  Virginia 
(1870). 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      307 

of  all  special  acts  relating  to  cities  has  been  incorporated  in 
other  constitutions,  so  that  over  half  of  the  states  have 
now  abolished  the  special  charter  system,  at  least  theoreti- 
cally, by  constitutional  provision,  and  require  cities  to  be 
incorporated. by  general  laws. 

Classified  Charter  System. —  But  the  general  charter 
system  under  which  the  legislature  was  required  to  provide 
a  machinery  of  government  and  an  extent  of  powers  alike 
for  all  cities,  while  it  did  tend  to  make  it  harder  for  the 
legislature  to  interfere  improperly  in  the  concerns  of  in- 
dividual cities,  was  by  no  means  without  its  drawbacks, 
since  it  prevented  proper  as  well  as  improper  distinctions 
between  cities.  So  in  a  large  number  of  the  states  that 
had  incorporated  the  requirements  of  the  general  charter 
system,  the  legislatures  either  simply  ignored  the  prohibi- 
tion, as  in  Ohio  for  nearly  twenty  years  after  1851,  or  as 
also  in  Ohio  later  on  circumvented  it  by  the  process  of 
classification  and  legislating  specially  for  the  cities  of  each 
class.  The  courts  commonly  held  that  such  classification 
was  not  a  violation  of  the  constitutional  prohibition 
against  special  legislation,  going,  in  some  cases,  even  to 
the  extent  of  sustaining  systems  of  classification  which 
put  each  city  of  the  state  in  a  special  class. 

Thus  arose  the  classified  charter  system  which  was  orig- 
inated to  overcome  the  requirement  of  absolute  uniformity 
and  which  is  now  not  only  permissible  by  judicial  sanc- 
tion in  a  number  of  states  having  the  prohibition  against 
special  legislation,  but  is  expressly  permitted  or  even  re- 
quired by  the  constitutions  of  a  dozen  other  states,  some 
of  which  define  the  classes  which  may  be  created.9  The 
classified  charter  system  under  which  cities  may  be 
grouped  into  classes  according  to  population  with  differ- 
:nt  charters  for  different  classes  is,  if  properly  safeguarded 

0  Kentucky,  New  York,  Minnesota,  and  Virginia. 


308  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

against  abuse,  a  distinct  improvement  over  a  rigid  general 
charter  system,  because  it  takes  into  account  the  fact  that 
cities  of  different  sizes  have  different  needs  and  should  not 
all  be  treated  alike.  This  is  regarded  in  this  country  as 
almost  axiomatic,  but  it  may  be  recalled  in  this  connec- 
tion that  France,  whose  local  government  is  certainly  not 
inferior  to  our  own,  has  found  it  practicable  to  legislate 
uniformly  not  merely  for  all  sizes  of  communities  that  we 
should  call  cities,  but  also  for  the  most  insignificant  of 
rural  communes,  as  small  as  our  smallest  hamlets. 

Home-Rule  Charter  System. —  But  under  all  three  of 
the  charter  systems  so  far  considered  the  local  electors  in 
the  city  whose  charter  was  to  be  granted  or  amended  had 
no  direct  voice  in  determining  the  kind  of  charter  under 
which  they  were  to  be  governed.  Under  the  special  char- 
ter system,  it  is  true,  the  local  electors  could  bring  some 
pressure  to  bear  upon  their  representatives  in  the  legisla- 
ture to  secure  the  passage  of  the  kind  of  a  charter  desired 
by  them,  but  even  if  the  legislators  involved  were  not  in- 
fluenced by  special  interests  in  the  fixing  of  the  charter 
provisions,  the  forces  in  control  of  the  whole  legislature 
might  step  in  to  defeat  the  express  purpose  of  the  local 
citizens.  Under  the  general  charter  and  classified  charter 
systems  there  was  even  less  likelihood  that  local  opinion 
would  be  effective  in  a  positive  way.  In  New  York  where 
cities  are  classified  by  the  constitution,  acts  applying  to 
less  than  all  the  cities  in  a  class  are  subject  to  a  suspensive 
veto  of  the  local  authorities,  but  this  does  not  insure  in 
any  way  a  positive  influence  to  the  locality.  It  was  the 
continuance  of  legislative  interference  with  cities,  particu- 
larly with  the  more  important  cities  that  resulted  in  the 
so-called  home-rule  charter  system  coming  into  being, 
as  a  means  of  insuring  not  merely  a  negative  protection 
against  individual  meddling  by  the  legislature,  but  also 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      309 

a  positive  voice  in  determining  the  framework  of  city 
government. 

The  home-rule  charter  movement  began  in  Missouri  in 
1875  when  the  constitution  of  that  year  gave  to  cities  of 
over  100,000  population,  and  specifically  to  St.  Louis, 
the  right  to  frame  and  adopt  their  own  charters.  This 
was  a  distinctly  new  departure  in  the  direction  of  giving 
the  local  electorate  a  voice  in  the  drawing  up  of  the  city 
charter.  The  idea  made  but  slow  progress  in  other  states, 
only  three  states,  California,  Washington,  and  Minnesota 
having  adopted  the  principle  in  the  next  thirty  years. 
But  since.  1900  nine  other  states  have  adopted  the  home- 
rule  charter  system,  Colorado,  Oregon,  Oklahoma,  Michi- 
gan, Arizona,  Ohio,  Nebraska,  Texas,  and  Maryland,  so 
that  this  system  is  characteristic  of  the  method  of  grant- 
ing city  charters  in  over  one-fourth  of  the  states  to-day, 
and  is  worthy  of  brief  consideration. 

The  details  of  the  s'ystem  vary  considerably  from  state 
to  state  but  the  basic  idea  is  the  same  in  all.  The  size  of 
the  cities  to  which  the  privilege  of  framing  their  own  char- 
ters is  extended  varies  from  the  smallest  cities  or  villages 
in  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Ohio,  and  Oregon  to  cities  over 
100,000  in  Missouri,  and  to  Baltimore  alone  in  Mary- 
land. In  every  case  there  is  to  be  a  local  board  to 
draft  a  charter,  upon  action  by  the  local  council  or 
upon  petition  of  the  electors.  This  body  is  almost  uni- 
versally elected  and  its  labors  must  be  ratified  by  a  major- 
ity vote  of  the  local  electors  in  every  state  except  Oregon, 
where  the  city  council  itself  may  act.  In  California  the 
legislature  of  the  state  must  approve  the  charter,  but  may 
not  amend  it.  In  Michigan  the  Governor  has  a  suspen- 
sive veto  which  may  be  overridden  by  two-thirds  of  the 
charter  commission,  and  in  Oklahoma  and  Arizona  the 
Governor  must  approve  the  charter  but  may  refuse  only 


310  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

if  it  is  in  conflict  with  the  state  constitution  or  laws.  The 
same  general  provisions  apply  to  charter  amendment. 

These  home-rule  charter  provisions  relate  in  general 
also  to  other  powers  than  that  merely  of  adopting  a  frame- 
work of  government.  But  the  extent  of  the  functional 
powers  conferred  presents  a  very  complicated  question 
which  will  be  considered  at  another  place.  Suffice  it  to 
say  here,  the  freedom  accorded  to  cities  to  initiate  their 
own  plan  of  city  organization  has  resulted  in  a  tremen- 
dous stimulation  of  interest  in  these  matters  and  has  been 
largely  responsible  for  the  extensive  adoption  of  the 
newer  forms  of  city  government  in  this  country.  So  far 
as  the  mere  machinery  of  city  government  is  concerned 
there  would  seem  to  be  no  valid  objection  to  allowing  each 
city  to  choose  that  form  which  it  deems  best.  The  ex- 
tension of  the  home-rule  charter  system  to  other  states  is 
imminent.10 

Optional  Charter  System —  The  fifth  method  of  grant- 
ing city  charters  is  that  known  as  the  optional  system  and 
is  quite  commonly  found  in  states  that  have  not  adopted 
the  home-rule  charter  system.  Under  this  plan  the  legisla- 
ture enacts  two  or  more,  in  New  York  seven,  different 
organic  laws  for  cities  and  allows  the  cities  to  select  from 
among  them.  More  than  a  dozen  states  have  chosen  this 
mean  between  the  extremes  of  absolute  uniformity  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  complete  local  divergence  possible  under 
the  home-rule  charter  system  on  the  other.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  however,  that  this  system  provides  no  constitutional 
check  upon  the  legislative  power  over  cities.  What  free- 
dom the  legislature  allows  it  may  take  away.  But  since 
the  legislature  could  not  delegate  its  legislative  power  by 

10  Passed  by  the  Wisconsin  legislature  and  by  the  Pennsylvania 
legislature  in  1919  for  the  first  time.  See  American  Year  Book, 
1 9 19,  p.  237. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      311 

authorizing  each  city  to  adopt  its  own  charter  in  the  ab- 
sence of  constitutional  authorization,  the  next  best  method 
of  securing  local  option  is  to  offer  a  sufficient  variety  of 
charter  types  to  suit  every  taste.11 

The  Popular  Basis  of  City  Government 

Powers  of  the  Electorate. —  It  may  be  laid  down  as 
an  almost  universal  rule  that  the  qualifications  for  voting 
in  American  cities  are  the  same  as  those  for  voting  in  the 
regular  state  elections.  The  principal  exceptions,  prior 
to  the  adoption  of  the  Nineteenth  Amendment,  occurred 
in  those  states  where,  although  women  had  not  been  ad- 
mitted to  the  suffrage  generally,  they  were  permitted  to 
vote  in  municipal  elections.  In  some  instances,  on  the 
other  hand,  only  property  taxpayers  are  allowed  to  vote 
in  local  elections  on  bond  issues.  But  generally  speaking, 
the  municipal  franchise  like  the  state  franchise  is  now 
based  on  the  principle  of  universal  adult  suffrage,  the  var- 
iations found  in  different  states  with  regard  to  citizenship, 
residence,  and  educational  requirements  being  reflected  in 
the  city  electorate  also. 

The  participation  of  the  electorate  in  the  government 
of  the  city  presents  two  rather  distinct  phases  and  may  be 
conveniently  classified  into  indirect  and  direct  participa- 
tion.     The  indirect  participation  consists  in  the  nomina- 

11  In  accordance  with  thej^neral  constitutional  theory  of  our 
American  separation  of  po«Band  the  lodging  of  the  legislative 
power  in  the  legislature,  it  ™d  not  be  constitutional  for  the  leg- 
islature to  delegate  its  power  of  incorporation  and  charter  legis- 
lation to  the  cities  themselves.  It  is  interesting  to  note,  however, 
that  as  early  as  1858  the  Iowa  legislature  did  confer  on  cities  operat- 
ing under  existing  charters  the  right  to  amend  their  charters  inde- 
pendently of  the  legislature,  a  power  which  was  sustained  by  the 
state  courts.  This  is  perhaps  the  earliest  instance  of  a  real  though 
limited  home-rule  charter  power  in  this  country.  See  McBain, 
op.  cit.,  pp.  82-84. 


3i2  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

tion,  election,  and  recall  of  the  city  officials.  The  direct 
participation  consists  in  the  adoption  or  rejection  of  meas- 
ures by  means  of  the  initiative  and  referendum.  Each 
of  these  phases  of  popular  participation  in  city  govern- 
ment may  be  considered  briefly  here. 

Originally  the  participation  of  the  municipal  electorate 
in  the  government  of  the  city  was  confined  to  the  single 
process  of  choosing  the  elective  officials,  after  the  local 
electorate  had  been  consulted  in  the  constituent  ques- 
tion of  incorporation.  Furthermore,  the  number  of  city 
officials  chosen  by  popular  election  was  at  first  very  limited, 
the  members  of  the  city  council  being  normally  the  only 
officers  elected  in  that  manner.  But  gradually  the  number 
of  such  locally  elected  officials  increased  in  the  cities,  as  it 
did  in  the  counties.  We  have  seen  that  early  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  mayors  came  to  be  elected  by  popular  vote 
also,  and  with  the  expansion  of  administrative  activities 
an  increasing  number  of  administrative  officers,  boards, 
and  commissions  were  added  to  the  elective  list,  even 
judicial  officers  being  brought  under  the  elective  system  in 
the  enthusiasm  for  democracy  that  marked  the  second 
quarter  of  the  last  century. 

As  the  organization  and  effectiveness  of  political  parties 
developed  and  official  ballots  with  party  designations  be- 
came the  rule  it  was  found  that  the  right  of  voters  to  par- 
ticipate merely  in  the  elections  tended  to  become  largely  an 
empty  formality  unless  they  could  also  have  a  real  voice 
in  the  selection  of  the  candidates.  So  the  method  of  se- 
lecting candidates  was  made  the  subject  of  regulatory 
legislation  and  by  the  introduction  of  primary  elections, 
closed  and  open,  the  city  electorate  in  the  majority  of 
states  came  to  participate  in  two  elections  instead  of  one 
each  time  that  new  municipal  officials  were  to  be  chosen.12 

12  For  an  excellent  discussion  of  the  history  and  nature  of  pri- 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      313 

Then,  within  recent  years,  a  further  extension  of  the 
indirect  participation  of  the  municipal  electorate  has  oc- 
curred in  the  adoption  of  the  recall,  a  device  by  which 
the  voters  of  the  city  were  enabled  to  get  rid  of  an  unde- 
sirable or  undesired  official  before  the  end  of  his  term, 
by  requiring  him,  upon  a  petition  signed  by  the  requisite 
number  of  voters,  to  come  before  them  at  an  elec- 
tion to  determine  whether  he  should  continue  in  office 
or  be  succeeded  by  someone  else.  This  new  departure 
originated  in  the  Los  Angeles  Charter  of  1903  and  has 
been  adopted  in  the  charters  of  more  than  a  hundred  cities 
since,  chiefly  those  operating  under  the  commission  or 
commission-manager  form  of  government,  though  the 
principle  has  been  given  wider  recognition  in  a  number  of 
state  constitutions,13  and  in  the  general  laws  of  a  num- 
ber of  others.14 

A  general  discussion  of  ballot  reform  in  this  country, 
which  affected,  of  course,  the  practice  of  elections  in 
cities  as  well  as  in  other  local  and  state  elections,  involv- 
ing such  developments  as  the  Australian  ballot,  corrupt 
and  illegal    practices    acts,    etc.,    cannot    be    undertaken 

mary  elections  see  Merriam,  Primary  Elections,  second  edition  (Chi- 
cago, 1909). 

13  Among  them  Arizona,  California,  Colorado,  Idaho,  Kansas, 
Louisiana,  Michigan,  Nevada,  Oregon,  and  Washington.  In  Idaho, 
Louisiana,  Michigan,  and  Washington  judges  are  excepted. 

14  Discussions  of  the  nature  and  operation  of  the  recall  may  be 
found  in  The  Initiative,  Referendum,  and  Recall,  edited  by  Munro 
(New  York,  1912)  ;  Oberholtzer,  Referendum,  Initiative,  and  Re- 
call in  America  (New  York,  191 1)  ;  Wilcox,  Government  by  All 
the  People  (New  York,  1912)  ;  Beard  and  Schultz,  Documents  on 
the  State-Wide  Initiative,  Referendum  and  Recall  (New  York, 
1911)  ;  Beard,  Digest  of  Short  Ballot  Charters  (New  York,  1911)  ; 
Barnett,  The  Operation  of  the  Initiative,  Referendum  and  Recall 
in  Oregon  (New  York,  1915)  ;  and  in  numerous  articles  in  the 
National  Municipal  Review  and  the  American  Political  Science 
Review. 


3i4  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

here.15  But  some  of  the  developments  that  had  particu- 
lar relation  to  or  special  significance  in  cities  may  be 
briefly  mentioned.  The  domination  of  municipal  poli- 
tics by  state  party  organizations  has  led  to  several  de- 
velopments intended  to  diminish  this  undesirable  influ- 
ence, among  which  may  be  noted  especially  the  separa- 
tion of  city  from  general  elections  and  the  increasing  use 
of  the  nonpartisan  ballot.  The  whole  so-called  short- 
ballot  movement,  moreover,  which  aims  to  increase  the 
power  of  the  individual  voter  by  making  his  task  simpler 
and  more  interesting  and  freeing  him  from  the  necessity 
of  relying  on  professional  political  guidance,  has,  like  the 
abolition  o'f  ward  politics  urged  for  similar  reasons,  made 
the  most  marked  progress  so  far  in  connection  with  the 
spread  of  commission  government  for  cities.  In  this 
connection  might  also  be  mentioned  the  development  of 
the  civil-service  merit  system,  which  was  particularly 
applicable  to  cities  and  which  has  there  manifested  some 
of  its  most  interesting  and  instructive  aspects. 

The  Preferential  Ballot  and  Proportional  Represen- 
tation.—  Two  recent  developments  in  reform  inaugur- 
ated wholly  or  chiefly  in  cities  so  far  in  the  United  States 
are  of  sufficient  fundamental  importance  to  warrant  a 
brief  mention  here.  These  are  the  preferential  ballot  and 
proportional  representation,  which  stand  in  no  necessary 
relation  to  each  other  but  which  as  a  matter  of  fact  are 
found  combined  in  the  system  of  proportional  representa- 
tion adopted  by  the  three  American  cities  operating  un- 
der that  system  at  present. 

The  theory  of  the  preferential  ballot  is  very  simple.16 
The  ordinary  ballot  expresses  fully  the  voter's  choice  only 

15  For  a  bibliography  of  literature  dealing  with  these  general 
phases  of  elections  and  ballot  reform  see  Munro,  Bibliography  of 
Municipal  Government  (Cambridge,  1915),  pp.  44-48. 

16  See  the  author's  Applied  City  Government,  pp.  13-16. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     315 

if  there  are  no  more  than  two  candidates  for  any  given 
position.  If  there  are  more  than  two  candidates  then  a 
voter  in  casting  his  ballot  for  a  particular  candidate  is 
at  the  same  time  voting  against  all  the  other  candidates 
equally.  Now  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  usually  true  that 
if  there  are  a  number  of  candidates  in  the  field,  and  one  of 
the  aims  of  the  ballot  reform  has  been  to  make  candida- 
cies possible  for  the  independent  man  without  organized 
party  support,  the  voter  is  by  no  means  indifferent  as  to 
which  of  the  other  candidates  is  chosen  in  case  his  own 
selection  fails  to  get  in.  Briefly  stated  the  preferential 
ballot  is  intended  to  make  it  possible  for  the  voter  to  reg- 
ister his  opinion  of  the  other  candidates  in  addition  to 
indicating  his  own  preference.  This  is  done  by  permit- 
ting him  to  indicate  on  the  ballot  in  appropriate  columns 
or  by  the  use  of  figures  his  own  candidate  as  first  choice 
and  the  order  in  which  he  approves  of  the  other  candi- 
dates. 

When  the  votes  are  counted  the  first  choices  are  added 
up  first.  If  any  of  the  candidates  has  received  a  major- 
ity of  first  choices  he  is  declared  elected  and  the  result 
is  just  the  same  as  though  the  preferential  feature  had 
not  been  used.  But  if  no  candidate  has  succeeded  in  get- 
ting such  a  majority  then  the  preferential  feature  comes 
into  play.  The  second  choices  cast  for  each  candidate 
are  then  counted  and  added  to  his  first  choices.  If  the 
total  of  first  and  second  choices  cast  for  any  candidate 
then  equals  a  majority  of  the  ballots  cast,  that  candi- 
date is  declared  elected.  Tf  that  is  not  the  case,  the  third 
choices  for  each  candidate  are  added  to  the  others  and 
the  candidate  receiving  the  largest  total  is  declared 
elected.17     Under  the  prevailing  plurality  rule  effective  in 

17  There  are  several  variations  in  the  forms  of  preferential  bal- 
lots used,  in  the  instructions  issued  to  the  voters,  and  in  the  manner 


316  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

this  country  the  candidate  receiving  the  largest  number  of 
votes  would  be  declared  elected  no  matter  how  small  a 
proportion  of  the  total  vote  that  might  be,  and  no  matter 
how  strongly  the  majority  may  have  been  opposed  to  him, 
as  evidenced  by  the  preferential  choices  cast.  The  per- 
son selected  under  the  preferential  plan  will  at  the  very 
least  be  more  or  less  acceptable  to  the  largest  number  of 
voters,  though  of  course  no  strict  majority  election  is 
possible  under  the  preferential  system  if  there  is  not  as  a 
matter  of  fact  a  candidate  who  can  secure  a  majority  of 
first  choices. 

The  possible  evils  of  plurality  election  are  well  recog- 
nized and  it  may  be  pointed  out  here  that  the  preferential 
ballot  furnishes  a  much  better  cure  for  those  evils  than 
can  be  secured  by  the  second  election  limited  to  the  two 
highest  candidates  in  the  first  election,  a  method  that  is 
employed  in  some  states  to-day  in  the  primary  elections. 
For,  where  there  are  a  large  number  of  candidates  in  the 
first  election  it  may  well  be  that  neither  of  the  two  high- 
est candidates  is  at  all  acceptable  to  the  majority  of  the 
voters.  Not  only  does  the  preferential  ballot  record  the 
voters'  wishes  more  accurately  in  case  there  are  no  real 
majority  candidates,  but  it  does  away  with  the  expense 
and  trouble  of  a  second  election,  and  if  applied  to  the 
regular  election  makes  primaries  unnecessary,  since  the 
voter  can  effectively  nominate  and  elect  at  the  same  time, 
the  result  of  the  primaries  being  principally  to  limit  the 
contesting  candidates  to  the  ones  standing  highest  on  the 
party  lists. 

of  counting  employed,  but  the  one  here  given  is  used  because  of  its 
simplicity  for  purposes  of  illustration.  For  further  references  on 
the  preferential  ballot  see  the  following  articles  in  the  National 
Municipal  Review:  Vol.  I,  pp.  386-400  (July,  1912),  and  Vol.  Ill, 
PP-  49-56  and  83-92  (January,  1914).  Also  Hoag,  "Effective  Vot- 
ing" (Washington,  1914),  Senate  Document  No.  359,  63d  Con- 
gress, 2d  Session. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      317 

Preferential  voting  originated  in  this  country  in 
Grand  Junction,  Colorado,  and  has  since  been  adopted  by 
more  than  fifty  cities.  As  originally  applied  it  was 
intended  to  substitute  a  complete  expression  of  the 
voters'  opinion  of  several  candidates  for  one  position  for 
the  inaccurate  and  unsatisfactory  plurality  election.  Pro- 
portional representation,  however,  the  other  and  most  re- 
cent election  reform  adopted  by  American  cities,  gives 
expression  to  an  entirely  different  viewpoint.  It  denies 
the  propriety  of  election  by  majorities  for  legislative 
bodies  since  that  leaves  minorities  totally  without  any 
representation  in  the  election  district.  Various  schemes 
for  minority  representation  have  been  tried  at  various 
times  in  this  country  and  abroad,  such  as  the  limited  vote 
and  the  cumulative  vote,  but  proportional  representation 
in  its  orthodox  form  discards  half-way  measures  and  sets 
up  as  its  ideal  the  reproduction  in  miniature  in  the  legis- 
lative body  of  the  groups  of  voters  who  are  united  on  the 
choice  of  a  candidate.  For  attaining  this  end  there  are 
two  main  forms  of  proportional  representation,  the  list 
system  and  the  so-called  Hare  system,  though  there  are 
a  number  of  variations  of  the  two  main  systems  in  use 
or  advocated  by  supporters  of  the  proportional  repre- 
sentation idea.18     The  principal  difference  is  to  be  found 

18  Two  recent  works  dealing  with  proportional  representation 
are  Humphreys,  Proportional  Representation  (London,  191 1)  ;  and 
Commons,  Proportional  Representation,  second  edition  (New  York, 
1007).  Current  information  on  the  spread  of  the  proportional  rep- 
resentation movement  throughout  the  world  will  be  found  in 
the  Proportional  Representation  Review  (Haverford),  the  quarterly 
publication  of  the  American  Proportional  Representation  League. 
Discussions  and  explanations  of  the  system  are  also  contained  in 
the  pamphlets  of  that  organization.  Recent  articles  in  the  National 
Municipal  Review  deal  with  the  establishment  and  operation  of  the 
proportional  representation  system  in  the  American  cities  that  have 
adopted  this  plan.     See,  Vol.  V,  No.  1   (January,  1916),  p.  56;  Vol. 

ix,  No.  7  (July,  1920).  p-  408. 


318  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

in  the  fact  that  the  so-called  list  system  tends  to  emphasize 
party  alignments  by  grouping  the  names  of  candidates  in 
lists  while  the  Hare  system  tends  to  minimize  such  align- 
ments by  placing  the  names  on  the  ballots  in  alphabeti- 
cal or  chance  order  without  party  designation. 

As  the  Hare  system,  adopting  also  the  preferential  fea- 
ture, and  further  designated  as  the  unanimous-constitu- 
ency system,  and  from  the  point  of  view  of  counting  as 
the  system  of  the  single  trans ferrable  vote,  is  the  one 
which  has  been  supported  by  the  proponents  of  the  sys- 
tem in  this  country  and  the  one  actually  adopted  in  the 
cities  that  have  so  far  adopted  the  plan  in  this  country, 
a  brief  description  of  this  plan  may  here  be  included. 
The  electoral  quotient  or  quota  is  determined  by  dividing 
the  number  of  votes  cast  by  the  number  of  places  to  be 
filled  plus  one.19  Then  each  candidate  who  receives  a 
number  of  first  choices  equal  to  the  electoral  quotient  or 
quota  is  declared  elected.  If  any  such  candidate  or  can- 
didates receive  more  first  choices  than  necessary  to  elect 
them,  the  surplus  ballots  indicating  them  as  first  choice 
are  counted  for  the  candidate  not  yet  elected  who  is  des- 
ignated on  those  ballots  as  second  choice.  Then  all  can- 
didates whose  total  of  first  and  second  choices  equals  the 
quota  are  declared  elected  and  the  process  is  continued 
until  all  places  are  filled  or  all  surplus  votes  transferred. 
If  there  are  still  places  unfilled  then  the  lowest  candidate 
on  the  list  is  dropped  and  the  other  choices  on  his  ballot 
are  transferred  in  the  same  manner.  This  process  is 
continued  until  the  required  number  of  candidates  have 
been  chosen  or  only  the  required  number  remain  in  the 
count. 

19  In  the  Ashtabula  charter  as  amended  in  1915,  the  first  one  in 
this  country  to  adopt  the  proportional  representation  system,  there 
are  seven  members  of  the  city  council  to  be  elected  in  this  fashion. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      319 

The  proponents  of  proportional  representation  for 
cities  argue  that  the  election  at  large  of  councilmen, 
which  is  characteristic,  as  has  been  seen,  of  commission 
government  and  the  commission-manager  plan,  means 
that  the  majority  slate  goes  through  and  the  minority 
is  unrepresented.  Election  by  districts  or  wards  did  in 
practice  tend  to  insure  some  minority  representation, 
though  it  could  frequently  be  prevented  or  minimized 
by  skillful  gerrymandering,  whereas  under  election  at 
large  the  majority  party  would  select  the  entire  council, 
and  this  is  regarded  as  a  weakness.  There  are  some  ser- 
ious considerations  of  both  a  theoretical  and  a  practical 
nature  to  be  urged  against  proportional  representation,20 
but  the  spread  of  the  idea  in  other  countries  in  the  last 
few  years  has  been  phenomenal21  and  its  adoption  by 
four.22  American  cities  already  presents  an  entering 
wedge  that  in  all  probability  will  be  driven  home  by  the 
further  spread  of  the  system.  If  in  spite  of  obvious 
a  priori  objections  it  proves  its  value  in  American  cities, 
it  will  undoubtedly  be  widely  adopted  and  will  introduce 
a  rather  fundamental  departure  in  the  manner  of  consti- 
tuting the  city  representative  body. 

The  Initiative  and  Referendum. —  If  the  indirect  par- 
ticipation of  the  electors  in  city  government  has  shown  an 

20  See  an  article  by  the  author,  "  Proportional  Representation : 
A  Fundamental  or  a  Fad?"  in  the  National  Municipal  Review, 
April,  1916,  pp.  273-277,  and  an  answer  to  the  same  by  Humphreys, 
"  Proportional  Representation,"  ibid.,  July,  1916,  pp.  369-379. 

21  Among  the  more  important  recent  additions  to  the  ranks  of 
nations  electing  their  national  legislatures  on  this  plan  are  France 
in  1919;  Germany  under  the  new  Constitution  of  1919;  and  Uruguay 
in  the  Constitution  of  1919.  In  Great  Britain  the  House  of  Lords 
proposed  the  adoption  of  proportional  representation  in  the  Flectoral 
Reform  Bill  of  1918,  but  it  was  rejected  by  the  Commons. 

22  Ashtabula,  Ohio;  Kalamazoo,  Mich.;  Boulder,  Col.;  Sacramento, 
CaL 


320  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ever  increasing  complexity  and  need  for  careful  regula- 
tion, direction,  and  protection,  the  development  of  direct 
participation  in  the  shape  of  the  initiative  and  referendum 
has  increased  the  power  and  responsibility  of  the  voter 
even  more.  The  use  of  the  initiative  and  referendum  in 
this  country  is  not  confined  to  cities  nor  is  its  chief  appli- 
cation even  to  be  found  there,  for  as  instruments  of  direct 
positive  legislation  or  of  negation  of  legislative  measures, 
it  is  naturally  of  far  greater  significance  in  the  field  of 
state  government  where  the  fundamental  and  controlling 
laws  are  enacted,  than  in  the  field  of  city  government 
where,  as  will  be  seen,  legislation  plays  a  very  much  less 
important  part  in  the  governmental  processes.  Neverthe- 
less, since  the  use  of  these  governmental  devices  in  cities 
has  increased  tremendously  in  the  last  generation,  particu- 
larly in  conjunction  with  the  spread  of  the  simplified  city 
government  under  the  commission  and  commission-man- 
ager plans,  to  say  nothing  of  their  fundamental  use  in  con- 
nection with  the  framing  and  amending  of  the  city  char- 
ters themselves  already  noted  in  connection  with  the 
home-rule  and  optional  charter  systems,  they  cannot  be 
ignored  as  innovations  of  fundamental  significance  in  city 
government.23 

It  may  be  pointed  out  here  in  passing,  without  enter- 
ing into  a  consideration  of  the  theories  and  practice  of  the 
introduction  of  these  features  of  direct,  as  contrasted 
with  representative,  democracy,  into  city  government,  that 

23  Literature  on  the  initiative  and  referendum  in  America  is  now 
pretty  extensive.  Among  the  more  important  references  on  the 
subject  there  may  be  mentioned,  in  addition  to  the  books  noted  on 
page  313  as  containing  discussions  of  the  recall,  Bulletin  No.  6, 
"The  Initiative  and  Referendum"  (Boston,  1917),  printed  for  the 
Massachusetts  Constitutional  Convention ;  and  Bulletin  No.  2,  "  The 
Initiative,  Referendum,  and  Recall"  (Springfield,  1920),  prepared 
for  the  Illinois  Constitutional  Convention. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      321 

the  characteristics  of  urban  populations  commented  upon 
in  an  earlier  part  of  this  chapter  cannot  but  have  an  im- 
portant bearing  on  the  way  in  which  these  new  devices 
will  operate.  Conclusions  as  to  the  merits  or  defects  of 
such  governmental  features  will,  therefore,  have  to  be 
based  on  an  examination  of  how  they  actually  work  out 
in  cities  rather  than  on  general  considerations  or  even 
on  the  method  of  their  operation  in  the  state-wide  form. 
In  half  of  the  states  of  the  Union  either  the  referendum 
or  the  initiative  or  both  with  regard  to  ordinary  legisla- 
tion are  in  force,  and  the  referendum  on  constitutional 
changes  is,  of  course,  an  instrument  of  long  standing 
in  the  United  States  and  is  now  practically  universal  in 
the  states  of  the  union. 

V  Main  Types  of  City  Organization 

Types  of  City  Governments. —  We  have  seen  in  the 
historical  survey  of  local  government  in  the  United 
States  24  that  borough  government  in  colonial  times  was 
modeled  on  the  organization  found  in  English  boroughs, 
characterized  by  the  union  of  all  borough  powers  in  a 
council  comprising  councilors,  aldermen,  and  mayor,  the 
latter  chosen  normally  by  the  council,  though  in  a  number 
of  instances  appointed  by  the  governor  for  the  purpose  of 
control,  but  not  constituting  in  either  case  a  chief  execu- 
tive or  administrative  officer.  It  was  also  pointed  out 
that  in  the  post-Revolutionary  period  a  fundamental  de- 
parture from  this  type  of  city  organization  made  its  ap- 
pearance in  one  or  two  important  cities,  which  came  to 
characterize  the  typical  American  city  government  from 
that  time  on.  This  was  the  introduction  of  the  system 
of  checks  and  balances  and  separation  of  powers,  that 
played  such  a  large  part  in  the  organization  of  the  Fed- 

24  Chap.  ii. 


322  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

eral  Government,  into  the  municipal  field.  The  outstand- 
ing feature  of  this  type  of  city  government  as  it  gradually 
took  definite  form  and  soon  came  into  almost  universal 
use  was  the  independent  nature  of  the  position  of  the 
mayor;  who  was  made  directly  elective,  given  a  suspen- 
sive veto  over  the  acts  of  the  courtcil,  and  accorded  an 
increasing  amount  of  administrative  authority.  Thus 
arose  the  so-called  mayor-and-council  type  of  govern- 
ment, which  although  presenting  many  variations  in  the 
different  states  and  even  in  the  different  cities  of  the 
same  state,  and  undergoing  a  gradual  development  as 
a  whole  in  the  nineteenth  century  nevertheless  stands 
out  in  a  sufficiently  well  defined  manner  not  only  from 
the  earlier  council  type  but  also  from  the  newer  types 
that  have  been  developed  in  the  twentieth  century.  This 
mayor-and-council  type,  in  one  form  or  another,  is  still 
the  overwhelmingly  preponderating  type  of  city  govern- 
ment in  the  United  States  to-day,  for  not  only  is  it  found 
in  three-fourths  of  the  cities  that  in  19 10  had  a  popula- 
tion of  100,000  or  more,  but  also  in  the  great  majority 
of  the  cities  that  had  between  5,000  and  100,000  in  that 
year. 

The  second  type  of  American  city  government  origi- 
nated in  Galveston,  Texas,  in  1901  and  is  known  as  the 
commission  form  of  government.  This  is  characterized 
by  the  disappearance  of  the  independent  executive  and 
the  union  of  legislative  and  executive  powers  in  the  hands 
of  a  small  commission  elected  at  large.  In  its  funda- 
mental nature  it  presents  a  curious  reversion  to  the  col- 
onial type  of  a  century  and  a  quarter  before.  Commis- 
sion government  is  found,  with  modifications  and  varia- 
tions, in  between  three  and  four  hundred  cities  of  the 
United  States.  It  is  found  almost  wholly  in  cities  which 
had  a  population  of  less  than  250,000  in  1910  and  none 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      323 

of  the  nine  largest  cities  pf  the  United  States  in  that  year, 
those  with  more  than  500,000  inhabitants  at  that  time,  is 
operating  under  this  form.  This  type  of  government  is 
relatively  strong,  however,  in  the  class  of  cities  having 
between  25,000  and  100,000  inhabitants,  though  the  ma- 
jority of  commission  governed  cities  are  in  the  popu- 
lation classes  below  that  figure. 

The  third  type  of  city  government  is  known  as  the 
city-manager  plan  and  is  of  even  more  recent  origin  and 
of  much  more  restricted  extent.  It  is,  in  its  typical  form, 
rather  a  variation  of  commission  government  than  a 
distinctly  new  type  and  this  relationship  is  expressed  in 
the  term  commission-manager  government  which  is  now 
generally  applied  to  it.  In  this  form  the  city  commis- 
sion as  found  under  the  commission  form  is  retained, 
uniting  legislative  and  executive  or  administrative  pow- 
ers, but  the  chief  administrative  function  or  active 
direction  of  the  administration  is  entrusted  to  an  admin- 
istrative head  responsible  to  the  commission  and  com- 
monly known  as  the  city  manager.  This  type  of  govern- 
ment originated  in  Sumter,  South  Carolina,  in  19 12, 
although  Staunton,  Virginia,  seems  to  have  been  the  first 
city  to  employ  a  city  manager.  It  is  now  found,  includ- 
ing numerous  variations,  in  nearly  two  hundred  cities. 
But  only  a  few  cities  of  more  than  100,000  population 
have  so  far  adopted  the  plan  and  the  majority  of  places 
in  which  it  is  found  are  small  cities  of  around  five  thous- 
and population. 

The  Mayor-and-Council  Plan. —  The  mayor-and- 
council  plan  of  city  government,  which,  as  has  already 
been  noted,  is  the  prevailing  American  type  to-day,  and 
was  at  the  close  of  the  last  century  virtually  the  only 
type  here  found,  is  characterized  by  the  distribution  of 
the  powers  and  functions  of  the  city  among  several  gov- 


324  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ernmental  branches  in  imitation  of  the  check  and  balance 
plan  followed  in  the  Federal  and  state  governments. 
This  general  type  of  city  government  has  itself  under- 
gone a  rather  extensive  process  of  development  since  its 
inception  in  this  country,  with  the  result  that  not  only 
were  various  features  emphasized  at  different  times  in 
the  history  of  this  development,  but  even  now  there  are 
important  differences  to  be  noted  in  the  governmental 
organization  of  those  cities  that  are  operating  under  the 
plan. 

For  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  approxi- 
mately, the  city  council  was  the  more  important  of  the  two 
branches  of  government,  exercising  not  merely  the  chief 
legislative  power  but  also  a  considerable  control  over  the 
administrative  activities  of  the  city.  But  gradually  the 
general  practice  of  erecting  special  administrative  de- 
partments, sometimes  appointed  by  the  state  government, 
but  more  generally  popularly  elected,  cut  into  the  admin- 
istrative and  financial  powers  of  the  council,  while  the 
veto  power  of  the  mayor,  his  power  of  recommending 
legislation  in  his  messages,  and  his  increasing  importance 
as  political  head  of  the  city  as  well  as  the  practice  of 
minute  legislative  regulation  of  municipal  affairs  resulted 
in  a  marked  reduction  in  importance  of  the  legislative 
powers  of  the  council.  Finally  the  tendency  to  cen- 
tralize administrative  powers  in  the  hands  of  the  mayor, 
including  .such  fundamental  functions  as  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  budget  and  the  appointment  and  removal  of 
department  heads,  a  tendency  which  had  become  quite 
marked  toward  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century,  pretty 
definitely  shifted  the  political  center  of  gravity  to  the 
executive. 

The  Maycfr. —  The  American  city  mayor  is  now  uni- 
versally elected  by  popular  vote.     Herein  he  differs  not 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      325 

merely  from  the  colonial  mayors  and  mayors  of  the 
early  years  of  the  nineteenth  century,  who  were  ordinar- 
ily appointed  by  the  Governor  or  chosen  by  the  council, 
but  also  from  the  mayors  of  French  and  English  cities 
to-day,  who,  as  has  been  seen,  are  always  selected  by  the 
city  councils.  Special  qualifications  beyond  that  of  being 
a  qualified  voter  are  rare,  and  neither  long  public  ser- 
vice for  the  city  nor  conspicuous  ability  is  in  practice 
apparently  of  importance  in  determining  the  eligibility  of 
candidates.  As  a  rule,  faithful  service  to  the  political 
organization  that  controls  municipal  politics  is  the  best 
asset  a  candidate  for  the  office  can  possess. 

The  commonest  term  of  office  for  mayor  is  two  years, 
in  accordance  with  the  general  practice  as  to  the  term  of 
local  officers.  Single-year  terms  are  common  in  New 
England,  where  the  one-year  term  of  office  still  clings 
in  other  offices  also,  and  in  some  instances  three-year 
terms  are  found.  In  the  largest  cities  of  the  country  the 
four-year  term  is  common  and  it  may  be  seen  that  there 
is  a  distinct  tendency  toward  lengthening  the  term  from 
one  to  two  years  and  from  two  to  four  years  in  the 
larger  cities.  In  the  cities  with  two-year  terms,  fur- 
thermore, there  is  a  pretty  generally  recognized  practice 
that  the  incumbent  shall  be  entitled  to  the  candidacy  on 
his  party  ticket  for  a  second  term,  thus  tending  to  make 
the  term  a  four-year  term  in  fact.  It  seems  to  be  gen- 
erally agreed  that  the  four-year  term  is  more  desirable 
than  the  two-year  term,  because  the  importance  of  the 
mayor's  office  in  many  cities  is  such  that  he  must  have,  in 
order  to  become  acquainted  with  the  duties  of  his  office 
and  to  demonstrate  his  capacity  as  chief  officer  of  the 
city,  a  longer  period  of  service  than  two  years.  The 
danger  of  having  the  city  saddled  for  this  longer  period 
with  an  incompetent  or  unsatisfactory  mayor  is  some- 


326  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

what  offset  in  the  cities  that  have  adopted  the  device 
of  the  recall,  by  the  possibility  of  removing  him  before 
his  term  is  up  through  this  reverse  of  the  election  pro- 
cess. Otherwise  the  mayor,  like  other  local  officers,  is 
usually  onlv  removable  by  impeachment  or  by  action  of 
the  courts,  although  in  New  York  and  some  other  in- 
stances the  Governor  of  the  state  may  remove  the  mayor. 

Another  characteristic  of  the  American  mayor,  as  con- 
trasted with  the  French  and  English  mayors  is  that  he 
is  practically  always  a  salaried  officer.  In  the  smaller 
cities  that  salary  is  inadequate,  of  course,  and  even  in 
the  largest  cities,  where  in  some  instances  the  mayor  re- 
ceives a  salary  larger  than  that  of  the  Governor  of  the 
state,25  the  remuneration  is  not  sufficient  to  pay  the  ex- 
penses which  go  almost  inevitably  with  the  office.  Un- 
less the  position  is  held  by  public  spirited  men  of  inde- 
pendent means,  therefore,  a  relatively  rare  though  not 
unknown  occurrence,  the  mayor  almost  necessarily  looks 
to  other  incidental  and  sometimes  highly  questionable 
ways  of  making  up  the  financial  loss  involved  in  serving 
in  the  position,  for  the  office  of  mayor  is  seldom  a  step- 
ping stone  to  further  political  honors. 

The  powers  of  the  mayor  may  be  conveniently  con- 
sidered under  the  three  main  heads  of  legislative,  finan- 
cial, and  administrative.  On  the  legislative  side  the  po- 
sition of  the  American  city  mayor  is  closely  analogous 
to  that  of  the  state  Governor  and  the  national  President. 
He  may  recommend  measures  in  annual  or  special  mes- 
sages and  if,  as  is  not  infrequently  the  case,  he  is  in  ac- 
cord with  the  political  forces  that  control  a  majority  of 

25  In  New  York  the  Governor  receives  $10,000,  the  mayor  of 
New  York  City  $15,000.  In  Illinois  the  Governor  receives  $12,000, 
the  mayor  of  Chicago  $18,000.  In  Pennsylvania  the  Governor  re- 
ceives $io,ooo,  the  mayor  of  Philadelphia  $12,000.  In  Massachusetts 
the  Governor  and  the  mayor  of  Boston  each  receives  $10,000. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      327 

the  council,  or  is  himself  the  recognized  leader  of  the 
controlling  organization,  his  influence  on  the  trend  of 
city  legislation  may  be  very  great.  On  the  other  hand, 
through  the  now  nearly  universal  possession  of  the  sus- 
pensive veto  on  measures  passed  in  the  council,  he  wields 
a  powerful  political  weapon  of  a  negative  nature.  What- 
ever may  be  thought  of  the  value  of  the  suspensive  execu- 
tive veto  in  the  national  and  state  governments,  a  gov- 
ernmental device  that  is  distinctly  American,  the  con- 
sensus of  opinion  among  students  of  city  government 
seems  unmistakably  to  be  tending  to  discredit  it  in  the 
field  of  municipal  government.  Like  many  other  as- 
pects of  our  theory  of  checks  and  balances  in  government, 
it  has  operated  primarily  to  diffuse  responsibility  and 
confuse  the  voter,  rather  than  to  temper  corruption  or 
folly  in  the  legislative  body  with  superior  wisdom  and 
honesty  in  the  executive. 

Closely  related  to  the  power  of  the  mayor  over  legisla- 
tion is  his  power  over  the  budget.  A  budget,  properly 
speaking,  presents  both  administrative  and  legislative  as- 
pects. A  financial  statement  for  the  year  just  past  is 
part  of  every  proper  budget  and  its  preparation  and 
presentation  is  obviously  an  administrative  function.  A 
statement  of  estimated  expenditures  and  receipts  for  the 
coming  year  combined  with  proposals  whereby  the  pro- 
posed expenditures  may  be  met  is  also  of  the  essence  of 
a  budget.  But  this  obviously  involves  fundamental 
policies,  since  the  amount  of  money  which  the  city  will 
spend  and  the  manner  in  which  it  will  apportion  the  ap- 
propriations are  among  the  most  vital  matters  connected 
with  the  government  of  the  city.  Formerly  this  function 
was  performed  by  a  committee  of  the  council,  as  it  is 
in  England  to-day,  but  the  familiar  congressional  tactics 
of  log-rolling,  transplanted  into  the  ward  organization 


328  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  city  resulted  in  a  noticeable  tendency  to  take  this 
power,  along  with  so  many  others,  out  of  the  hands  of 
the  council.  In  some  cities,  notably  New  York,  Balti- 
more, and  Detroit,  this  function  has  been  put  into  the 
hands  of  a  special  board,  usually  known  as  the  board  of 
estimate  and  apportionment.  But  in  other  cities,  such 
as  Philadelphia  and  Boston  among  the  larger  municipal- 
ities, the  power  has  been  entrusted  to  the  mayor,  and  the 
trend  of  opinion  to-day  seems  to  be  strongly  in  favor  of 
the  so-called  executive  budget. 

If  by  an  executive  budget  is  meant  merely  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  original  budgetary  statement  and  proposals 
by  the  mayor,  the  council  being  left  free  to  deal  with 
his  proposals  as  it  pleases,  as  in  Philadelphia,  for  in- 
stance, a  more  orderly  program  is  possible,  but  the  evils 
of  log-rolling  have  not  been  eliminated,  evils  which  were 
largely  responsible  for  taking  the  budget  power  away 
from  the  council.  If,  however,  the  executive  budget  in- 
volves, as  it  does  in  Boston,  for  instance,  a  limitation 
upon  the  power  of  the  council  to  add  appropriation  items, 
then  there  is  a  further  very  serious  and  fundamental 
diminution  of  the  power  of  the  representative  body  in- 
volved, which  cannot  be  lightly  passed  over.  A  council 
may  conceivably,  and  should  theoretically,  be  in  a  better 
position  to  reflect  the  will  of  the  municipal  electorate 
as  to  how  much  importance  should  be  given  to  public 
education,  public  health,  police  and  fire  protection,  recre- 
ation, or  any  of  the  other  municipal  activities,  in  the  mu- 
nicipal program  for  the  ensuing  year,  than  a  single  official. 
If  a  mayor  could  be  presumed  to  err  only  on  the  side  of 
extravagance,  restricting  the  power  of  the  council  to 
cut  down  expenditures  could  well  be  justified.  But  a 
mayor  is  just  as  likely  to  err  in  not  giving  proper  impor- 
tance to  activities  that  may  be  regarded  as  very  impor- 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      329 

tant  by  the  electorate,  and  in  that  case  the  representative 
body  is  powerless  to  cure  the  omission.  From  that  point 
of  view  the  board  of  estimate  and  apportionment  plan  is 
less  objectionable,  because  the  opinion  of  a  group  of 
men  instead  of  just  one  man  is  substituted  for  that  of 
the  council.  But  this  plan  has  the  fundamental  defect 
of  adding  a  third  governing  authority  to  the  existing  leg- 
islative and  executive  branches,  to  deal  with  what  is  per- 
haps the  most  important  of  all  local  governmental  acts, 
the  raising  and  apportioning  of  the  funds  of  the  city. 

Under  the  head  of  strictly  administrative  powers  of 
the  mayor  may  be  mentioned  principally  the  power  of 
appointment  and  removal.  This  power,  like  the  veto 
power  was  accorded  to  the  nineteenth  century  mayor  in 
imitation  of  the  powers  of  the  President.  Like  the  ap- 
pointing powers  of  the  President,  furthermore,  so  far 
as  the  more  important  administrative  posts  in  the  city 
are  concerned,  the  mayor's  power  of  appointment  was 
commonly  limited  by  the  requirement  of  confirmation, 
either  by  the  upper  chamber  where  the  council  was  bi- 
cameral, or  by  the  council  as  a  whole  where  there  was 
only  one  chamber.  Whereas,  however,  the  President's 
power  of  removal  was  accorded  to  him  for  independent 
exercise,  the  mayor,  like  the  state  Governor,  commonly 
had  to  have  the  concurrence  of  the  confirming  authority 
for  removals.  The  growth  in  the  appointing  and  re- 
moval powers  of  the  American  mayor  during  the  latter 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century  has  been  very  marked,  not 
only  in  the  number  of  officers  who  have  been  brought 
under  that  power,  but  also  in  the  elimination,  at  least 
in  the  larger  cities,  of  the  requirement  for  confirmation 
of  appointments  and  concurrence  in  removals.  This  last 
feature  furnishes  just  another  illustration  of  the  futility 
of  the  check  and  balance  theory  as  a  working  principle 


330  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  government.  In  the  national  Government,  senatorial 
confirmation  as  regards  the  most  important  administrative 
posts  has  come  to  be  largely  a  matter  of  form,  while 
concurrence  in  removals,  after  one  unfortunate  period 
of  experimentation,  has  been  discarded.  In  the  states 
where  senatorial  confirmation  and  concurrence  have  been 
an  active  factor  in  appointments  and  removals,  they  have 
proven  most  undesirable  elements  in  party  politics,  and 
in  the  cities  they  have  fostered  controversies  and  "  deals  " 
to  the  utter  demoralization  of  the  administration  and  the 
confusion  of  the  voter.  The  tendency,  therefore,  in  re- 
cent years  has  been  distinctly  in  the  direction  of  increas- 
ing the  administrative  powers  and  responsibilities  of  the 
mayor  so  far  as  the  appointment,  removal,  and  conse- 
quently the  direction  of  the  higher  administrative  offic- 
ers are  concerned.  As  regards  the  subordinate  positions 
in  the  city  however,  the  spread  of  the  civil-service  merit 
system,26  has  tended  to  curtail  the  complete  development 
of  the  administrative  powers  of  the  mayor  in  this  re- 
gard.27 

The  Council. —  The  prevailing  type  of  city  council  to- 
day is  the  unicameral  one.  It  has  already  been  pointed 
out  that  the  imitation  of  the  Federal  scheme  of  govern- 
mental organization  in  the  post-Revolutionary  city  charters 
went  so  far  as  to  provide  a  bicameral  council,  and  for  a 
time  that  was  the  prevailing  type  in  the  larger  cities. 
But  in  the  last  decades  the  tendency  has  been  so  distinctly 

20  See  below,  pp.  340,  341. 

27  For  an  embodiment  of  the  best  expert  opinion  at  the  close  of 
the  last  century  as  to  the  powers  that  should  be  entrusted  to  the 
mayor  under  the  mayor-and-council  form,  in  order  to  cure  the  ad- 
ministrative evils  from  which  American  cities  were  suffering,  see 
the  municipal  program  or  model  charter  adopted  by  the  National 
[Municipal  League  in  1900,  the  text  of  which  may  also  be  found  in 
Deming,  Government  of  American  Cities  (New  York,  1909). 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      331 

in  the  direction  of  substituting  the  unicameral  for  the 
bicameral  system,  even  in  those  cities  retaining  the  mayor- 
and-council  form,  that  the  bicameral  type,  though  still 
fairly  prevalent,  is  not  only  much  less  general  than  the 
unicameral  form  but  is  in  a  fair  way  to  disappear,  save 
as  a  historical  remainder.  Of  the  ten  largest  cities  in  the 
United  States  not  one  presents  a  bicameral  council, 
though  practically  all  of  them  operated  under  that  type 
of  council  at  one  time.28  It  seems  unnecessary,  there- 
fore, to  devote  any  space  to  the  consideration  of  a  feature 
of  council  organization  that  was  adopted  without  reason 
and  has  amply  proved  itself  deserving  of  the  censure 
which  is  rapidly  throwing  it  into  the  discard  of  political 
experiments. 

There  is  the  greatest  variation  among  city  councils 
with  regard  to  size.  The  bicameral  councils  usually  com- 
prise a  larger  membership  than  unicameral  councils  in 
cities  of  the  same  size.  Indeed  the  tendency  toward  a 
reduction  in  the  size  of  the  council  is  scarcely  less  evident 
than  the  trend  toward  the  single  chambered  council.  The 
largest  cities  naturally  have  more  members  in  the  coun- 
cil, New  York  and  Chicago,  having  seventy-three  and 
seventy  members,  respectively.  But  the  smaller  cities 
show  a  relatively  larger  council  in  proportion  to  the  pop- 
ulation. 

Originally  our  city  councilors  were  selected  altogether 
by  wards,  and  that  is  the  prevailing  system  to-day,  both 
in  England  and  in  the  American  cities  operating  under 
the  mayor-and-council  plan.  But  the  ward  system  of 
election  came  into  disrepute  in  this  country  as  one  of  the 
contributing  causes  in  the  decline  in  caliber  of  the  city 

28  Of  the  128  cities  of  more  than  30,000  population  operating  un- 
der the  mayor-and-council  form  in  1917  only  24  had  the  bicameral 
council,  chiefly  in  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  and  Virginia. 


332  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

councilmen,  a  phenomenon  that  has  been  noted  by  every 
commentator  on  American  city  government.  The  re- 
production in  miniature  of  the  congressional  tactics  of 
log-rolling  for  securing  the  benefits  of  expenditures  for 
public  works  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  most  serious 
of  the  ills  under  which  our  cities  suffered  during  the 
darkest  days  of  American  city  government  immediately 
after  the  Civil  War.  The  very  term  "  ward  politics  " 
in  its  popularly  accepted  sense  evidences  the  extent  to 
which  this  evil  made  itself  felt  in  city  life.  Therefore 
there  has  been  a  determined  attack  directed  against  the 
system  of  election  by  wards  which  has  resulted  in  a  modi- 
fication of  that  system  either  by  substitution  of  election 
at  large  or  by  a  combination  of  the  latter  with  the  ward 
system.  Entire  abolition  of  the  ward  system  is  practi- 
cally restricted,  however,  to  cities  adopting  the  commis- 
sion or  commission-manager  form. 

There  are  usually  no  special  qualifications  required 
for  city  councilor,  beyond  the  customary  ones  of  citi- 
zenship, residence,  and  majority  required  for  the  fran- 
chise, nor  are  ability  or  accomplishments  apparently  prac- 
tical prerequisites  to  securing  the  office.  In  the  matter  of 
the  type  of  men  elected  to  city  councils,  American  cities 
always  suffer  in  a  comparison  with  those  of  England, 
France,  or  Germany,  as  well  as  with  the  city  councils  of 
the  earlier  part  of  the  last  century  in  this  country.  The 
various  explanations  given  of  the  decline  in  caliber  of 
the  American  city  councilors  are  interesting,  but  of  more 
value  are  considerations  of  how  the  present  condition 
can  be  remedied.  It  seems  clear  that  the  position  of 
councilor  in  the  typical  American  mayor-and-council 
city  is  distinctly  less  important  and  therefore  less  attrac- 
tive than  in  England  or  in  Germany.  The  domination 
of  the  party  machine  in  municipal  politics  is  also  more 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      333 

fully  developed  in  the  United  States  and  tends  to  sup- 
press independence  of  thought  and  action.  It  would 
seem,  therefore,  that  to  increase  the  importance  of  the 
council  and  to  limit  the  control  of  party  organization 
over  it,  would  tend  to  make  a  post  on  the  council  more 
attractive  to  the  desirable  type  of  man.  As  these  devel- 
opments are,  however,  very  difficult  of  attainment  under 
the  mayor-and-council  type  of  city  government,  the 
question  will  be  taken  up  again  in  connection  with  the 
consideration  of  the  newer  types  of  city  organization. 
It  may  be  noted  in  passing,  however,  that  the  caliber  of 
the  councilmen  is  apparently  not  closely  related  to  the 
salary  paid,  at  least  the  caliber  does  not  improve  as  sal- 
aries increase.  The  European  countries  which  are 
pointed  to  as  having  better  municipal  councils  pay  no 
salaries  at  all.  In  the  United  States  the  larger  cities 
practically  all  pay  salaries  varying  from  $1,000  or  less 
to  $5,ooo,29  and  even  in  the  smaller  cities  it  is  common  to 
find  a  remuneration  paid  either  in  the  shape  of  salary  or 
of  fees  for  attending  council  meetings.  If  salaries  are 
paid,  there  will  always  be  aspirants  for  the  position  who 
possess  no  qualifications  commensurate  with  their  desire 
for  office.  If  no  salaries  are  paid  and  considerable  time 
is  demanded  by  the  duties  of  the  office  there  is  the  ob- 
jection that  the  financially  weaker  class  are  excluded  from 
the  position.  But  if  the  position  of  councilor,  while 
made  important  because  of  the  powers  enjoyed  by  the 
council  and  the  influence  assured  to  the  individual,  could 
be  relieved  of  time  consuming  details,  it  could  be  made 
at  once  attractive  for  the  able  public  spirited  man  of  what- 
ever economic  class,  and  forbidding  to  the  professional 
officeholder  who  now  looms  so  large  in  the  membership 
of  our  city  councils. 

29  In  Philadelphia  under  the  new  charter. 


334  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  meetings  of  the  city  councils  usually  occur  once  a 
week,  even  in  the  smaller  cities.  The  organization  of  the 
council  is  usually  fixed  in  the  charter  or  the  laws;  but 
in  any  case  both  the  organization  and  the  rules  of  proce- 
dure, which  latter  are  commonly  adopted  by  the  council 
itself,  are  modeled  very  much  on  the  lines  followed  in 
the  state  legislatures.  The  committee  system  plays  an 
important  part  in  the  work  of  councils  in  the  larger  cities, 
though  the  committees  have  lost  in  importance  in  the 
council  in  much  the  same  measure  as  the  council  has 
lost  its  former  importance  in  the  city  government,  since 
administrative  functions  were  during  the  first  part  of 
the  nineteenth  century  largely  in  the  hands  of  the  council 
committees. 

The  most  striking  thing  about  the  powers  of  the  coun- 
cil is,  as  has  been  suggested,  their  steady  decline  during 
the  last  century.  The  powers  of  the  council  under  the 
mayor-and-council  form  may  be  classified,  as  were  those 
of  the  mayor,  as  legislative,  financial,  and  administrative. 
The  legislative  power  includes  the  power  to  adopt  by- 
laws or  ordinances  on  matters  put  under  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  city.  This  power,  which  in  large  measure  dis- 
tinguishes city  government  from  county  government  in 
this  country,  is  shared  by  the  council,  as  has  been  seen, 
with  the  mayor,  whose  veto  may  be  overridden.  The 
ordinance  power,  furthermore,  is  not  as  broad  to-day 
as  it  formerly  was  because  of  the  legislative  practice  of 
minute  legislation  on  matters  of  special  concern  to  the 
cities.  It  labors,  also,  under  the  disadvantage  of  the 
doctrine  of  strict  construction  applied  by  the  courts, 
which  still  further  restricts  the  scope  of  the  ordinance 
power.  Nevertheless,  through  its  local  exercise  of  the 
police  power  in  the  broad  sense,  the  city  council  plays 
no  purely  titular  role,   and  certainly   what  the  council 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      335 

legislation  may  lack  in  vital  importance  it  makes  up  in 
volume,  for  the  yearly  output  of  ordinances  in  any  of 
the  larger  cities  is  surprising.  Important  among  the  leg- 
islative powers  of  the  council  is  the  power  to  enact  fran- 
chises for  public-service  corporations.  This  power  was 
formerly  very  broad  and  presented  in  its  exercise  one  of 
the  most  shocking  of  the  abuses  that  crept  into  city  gov- 
ernment. Consequently  it  is  now  enjoyed  within  very 
definite  limits  only,  constitutional  or  statutory  provisions 
commonly  prescribing  the  maximum  term  of  franchises 
and  governing  the  control  of  rates,  while  the  action  of 
the  council  in  granting  franchises  must  be  ratified  in  an 
increasing  number  of  instances  by  popular  vote. 

The  financial  powers  of  the  council  relate  in  the  first 
place  to  the  levying  of  taxes  and  the  appropriation  of 
moneys.  These  powers  also  are  exercised  under  the 
strictest  limitations,  constitutional,  legislative,  and  judi- 
cial. The  kind  of  taxation,  the  amount,  and  the  purposes 
for  which  it  can  be  assessed  are  all  fixed  by  constitution 
or  by  statute.  In  fact,  since  almost  every  city  of  impor- 
tance in  this  country  has  reached  the  point  where  it  needs 
to  raise  all  the  money  allowed  under  the  constitutional 
and  statutory  tax  limits,  the  function  of  the  council  is 
largely  restricted  to  a  voice  in  determining  how  the  avail- 
able money  shall  be  spent.  We  have  already  seen  how 
the  mayor  shares  in  that  fundamental  function,  and  how 
he  even  threatens  to  reduce  the  importance  of  the  council 
still  further  in  this  respect  by  the  limitation  of  the  lat- 
ter to  a  right  to  decrease  proposed  expenditures.  Simi- 
larly, the  power  to  borrow  money,  originally  entrusted 
to  the  city  council  with  few  restrictions,  is  now  so  circum- 
scribed by  constitutional  debt  limitations  and  statutory  re- 
strictions as  to  purposes  and  amounts  and  also  usually  by 
the  requirement  of  adoption  by  popular  vote  of  proposals 


336  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

to  issue  bonds,  that  the  council  retains  but  a  fraction  of 
its  former  dominance  even  in  this  respect. 

The  administrative  powers  of  the  city  council,  once  so 
important,  have  all  but  disappeared.  Appointment  by 
the  council  of  city  officials  is  ordinarily  limited  to  a  few 
posts,  notably  the  city  clerk,  and  the  power  of  confirming 
appointments  and  concurring  in  removals  by  the  mayor, 
is  as  we  have  seen  not  only  discredited  but  disappearing, 
though  still  found  in  a  considerable  number  of  cities.  Of 
course  individual  councilors  may  and  often  do  exert  a 
good  deal  of  influence  in  matters  of  appointment  and  re- 
moval, but  the  council  as  such,  which  until  about  the  mid- 
dle of  the  last  century  appointed  and  removed  the  admin- 
istrative officers  and  supervised  their  work  directly 
through  committees  of  its  own,  has  now  become  distinctly 
a  subordinate  factor  on  the  administrative  side  of  city 
government. 

The  Administrative  Departments. —  Another  charac- 
teristic of  American  city  government  during  a  part  of  the 
last  century  and  still  more  or  less  prevalent  to-day,  though 
apparently  definitely  on  the  decline,  is  the  separate  admin- 
istrative department,  independent  both  of  the  council  on 
the  one  hand  and  of  the  mayor  on  the  other.  We  have 
the  same  phenomenon  exhibited  in  our  state  governments 
and  to  such  an  extent  that  American  political  practice  has 
been  said  to  have  added  a  fourth  governmental  branch  to 
the  time-honored  trinity  of  legislative,  executive,  and  ju- 
dicial powers  in  the  form  of  an  administrative  branch. 
When  the  city  council  began  to  be  stripped  of  its  powers 
over  city  administration,  these  powers  were  frequently  en- 
trusted to  municipal  administrative  officers,  commissions, 
or  boards,  who  were  chosen  by  popular  election  and  hence 
were  coordinate  in  a  political  way  with  the  mayor  and 
the  council.     However  unsatisfactory  administration  by 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      337 

council  committees  may  have  come  to  be,  it  is  certain  that 
no  satisfactory  system  of  administration  could  develop 
under  the  independent  administrative  department.  For 
that  reason  the  trend  of  informed  opinion  and  of  charter- 
revision  practice  as  well  is  now  distinctly  in  the  direction 
of  abandoning  the  independent  administrative  boards  and 
centralizing  the  administrative  control  in  the  hands  of  the 
mayor  by  giving  him  the  power  of  appointment  and  re- 
moval over  the  chief  administrative  officers.  This  devel- 
opment is  by  no  means  complete,  for  we  still  find  numer- 
ous instances  of  independently  elected  authorities,  such 
as  health  boards,  park  boards,  library  boards,  etc.,  and 
most  common  of  all  school  boards.  The  theoretical  and 
practical  considerations  in  favor  of  concentrating  all  ad- 
ministrative responsibility  in  place  of  scattering  it  among 
unrelated  authorities  are  so  convincing  that  one  is  sur- 
prised to  find  these  violations  of  the  recognized  principle 
so  general. 

Aside  from  popular  election  and  appointment  by  the 
mayor,  we  find  still  another  method  in  vogue  for  selecting 
the  administrative  authorities  for  the  city,  namely  ap- 
pointment by  state  authorities.  It  will  be  remembered 
that  appointment  of  the  mayor  by  the  central  authorities 
was  not  uncommon  early  in  the  nineteenth  century.  One 
of  the  earliest  instances  of  the  abuse  by  state  legislatures 
of  their  power  over  cities  was  the  creation  of  boards 
or  commissions  for  performing  some  special  function  in 
the  city,  the  members  of  which  were  centrally  appointed.30 
Both  of  these  practices  came  quite  commonly  to  be  forbid- 
den by  constitutional  provisions.  But  state  appointment 
of  municipal  administrative  authorities  was  not  always  for 
improper  purposes.  When  conditions  in  the  police  de- 
partments of  some  cities  became  intolerable,  the  state  has 

30  See  McBain,  op.  cit.,  pp.  45-48. 


338  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

sometimes  had  to  step  in  and  appoint  police  heads,  and 
in  several  of  the  largest  cities  in  the  country  this  is  still 
the  case  to-day,  though  the  practice  has  been  abandoned 
in  other  cities  where  it  was  followed  for  a  while.  Cen- 
tral appointment  of  heads  of  municipal  administrative 
departments  in  other  branches,  is  also  found  to  a  limited 
degree,  but  as  this  method  of  selecting  administrative 
authorities  is  extremely  unpopular  locally  and  has  not 
shown,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  any  marked  advantages  over 
local  appointment  in  those  cities  where  it  has  been  tried, 
it  is  not  likely  to  become  a  common  method  of  selection. 

Where  the  power  of  appointing  department  heads  has 
been  transferred  to  the  mayor  without  the  necessity  of 
the  council's  confirmation,  the  discretion  of  the  mayor  is 
not  ordinarily  limited  in  any  way,  the  usual  civil-service 
rules  and  regulations  expressly  exempting  department 
heads  from  their  operation.  There  is  a  good  deal  to  be 
said  on  both  sides  of  the  question  as  to  whether  the  com- 
petitive examination  principle  can  advantageously  be  ap- 
plied to  the  higher  administrative  posts.  The  weight  of 
opinion  seems  to  be  opposed  to  such  an  extension  of 
the  principle,  but  civil-service  reform  enthusiasts  are  in- 
clined to  favor  such  a  development.  At  present,  however, 
Boston  almost  alone  of  all  large  cities  represents  an  inter- 
esting and  unusual  illustration  of  an  attempt  to  limit  the 
power  of  the  mayor  in  appointing  to  the  higher  adminis- 
trative posts,  by  insisting  on  special  qualifications,  the 
state  civil-service  commission  having  to  assent  to  the 
selection  as  representing  a  candidate  qualified  by  training 
or  experience  to  fill  the  position.  Even  this,  however,  is 
not  an  application  of  the  competitive  examination  prin- 
ciple. 

Removals  from  the  higher  posts  are  usually  made  by 
the  appointing  authority.     Here  again  the  difficulty  of 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      339 

devising  checks  on  the  removal  power  which  will  not 
prove  positive  detriments  to  efficient  administration  has 
operated  to  leave  the  removal  power  unhampered  in  many 
cases. 

In  the  manner  of  the  composition  of  the  chief  adminis- 
trative authorities  American  cities  show  no  less  striking 
variations  than  in  the  manner  of  their  selection.  Single 
officers,  small  commissions,  large  boards  are  all  repre- 
sented in  the  list  of  such  authorities.  At  first  the  board 
or  multi-headed  administrative  authority  was  the  more 
prevalent  and  it  is  found  very  generally  even  to-day  es- 
pecially in  such  departments  as  health,  education,  parks, 
libraries,  museums,  recreation,  etc.  But  the  advantages 
of  the  commissioner  or  single  headed  type,  not  only  in 
departments  such  as  those  for  police  and  fire  protection, 
but  also  in  health  administration  and  other  departments, 
are  becoming  so  generally  recognized  that  the  commis- 
sioner plan  seems  definitely  to  be  supplanting  the  board 
plan.31  The  benefits  of  the  deliberative  aspects  of  board 
action  might  be  retained  by  the  use  of  advisory  boards 
whose  opinion,  on  the  French  principle,  though  it  must  be 
asked,  need  not  bind  the  officer. 

In  the  matter  of  salaries  and  term  of  office,  there  are, 
of  course,  the  greatest  variations  among  cities.  But  it 
may  be  said  without  serious  danger  of  error  that  both  sal- 
aries and  terms  are  too  meager  to  secure  the  best  results. 
Although  boards  are  quite  frequently  unpaid,  which  indeed 
is  one  of  the  arguments  advanced  in  favor  of  the  board 
type  of  organization,  the  chief  official  under  the  board 
who  does  the  actual  work  of  administration  is  usually 
handicapped  by  inadequate  salary  and  uncertain  tenure. 

The  number  of  administrative  departments  provided 

31  For  the  relative  merits  of  the  board  and  commissioner  types  of 
organization  see  Munro,  op.  cit.,  pp.  252-257. 


340  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

for  each  city  will  depend  in  a  measure  upon  the  size  of 
the  city,  at  least  in  practice  the  larger  cities  show  a  good 
many  more  departments  than  are  found  in  the  smaller 
cities.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  multiplication 
of  city  departments  beyond  five  or  six  main  natural  di- 
visions of  municipal  functions  is  not  only  unnecessary  but 
tends  strongly  to  interfere  with  well  coordinated  admin- 
istration. Even  more  serious,  however,  than  the  multi- 
plicity of  departments  is  the  haphazard  and  unscientific 
distribution  of  functions  among  those  that  exist,  which 
is  characteristic  of  municipal  organization  in  this  country. 
As  municipal  administration  has  become  more  and  more 
complex  the  evils  of  unscientific  organization  have  made 
themselves  felt  more  and  more  and  a  good  deal  more  at- 
tention is  now  beginning  to  be  paid  in  city  charters  to 
this  important  matter.32 

Below  the  various  administrative  department  heads  come 
the  subordinate  officials  and  employees  of  the  city.  The 
combination  of  the  spoils  system  and  the  marked  expan- 
sion in  the  administrative  activities  of  cities  made  the 
patronage  in  the  larger  cities  a  matter  of  vital  concern  to 
the  political  parties,  with  the  result  that  positions  in  the 
city's  service  went  largely  to  politicians  or  henchmen  of 
politicians.  As  such  conditions  were  intolerable  and 
struck  right  at  the  heart  of  some  of  the  most  vital  con- 
cerns of  city  dwellers,  the  movement  for  the  introduction 
of  the  civil-service  merit  system  into  municipal  adminis- 
tration has  made  rapid  progress  in  American  cities.  In 
some  states  it  is  required  by  state  law  for  certain  munici- 
pal officials  and  in  a  large  and  continually  growing  number 
of  cities  it  is  being  locally  adopted.  There  are  many  ser- 
ious and  unanswered  problems  in  connection  with  the  ap- 

32  See  the  author's  Applied  City  Government  (New  York,  1914). 
Chap.  vi. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      341 

plication  of  the  civil-service  merit  system  which  it  is  not 
possible  to  consider  here.33  In  spite  of  all  possible  objec- 
tions, however,  it  seems  to  be  evident  that  our  only  hope 
for  the  development  in  this  country  of  sound  traditions 
and  a  controlling  public  opinion  such  as  separates  in  Eng- 
land, without  any  legal  restrictions,  the  municipal  admin- 
istrative posts  from  political  manipulation  is  by  means  of 
some  intermediary  experience  with  civil-service  merit 
rules  intelligently  and  honestly  observed.  The  annual 
growth  of  the  civil  service  reform  movement  in  American 
cities  may  be  regarded,  therefore,  as  promising  a  day  of 
more  efficient  administration  of  municipal  activities.34 
Commission  Government.35  —  There  is  no  need  of 
spending  any  time  attempting  a  scientific  definition  of 
commission  government,    for  authorities  themselves   do 

33  See  the  pamphlet  by  the  author,  "  A  Model  Civil-Service  Code 
for  Texas  Cities,"  University  of  Texas  Bulletins,  1914. 

34  The  literature  of  divil-service  reform  is  so  extensive  that  it 
is  possible  to  mention  here  only  a  few  of  the  more  important  refer- 
ences. Fish,  The  Civil  Service  and  the  Patronage  (New  York, 
1905),  is  one  of  the  best  works  on  civil-service  reform  in  this  coun- 
try, but  contains  little  about  cities.  More  recent  and  of  great 
interest  is  Foulke,  Fighting  the  Spoilsman  (New  York,  1919).  The 
most  valuable  sources  of  information  are  the  Proceedings  of  the 
National  Civil-Service  Reform  League,  and  the  monthly  period- 
ical Good  Government,  published  by  that  organization.  The  re- 
ports of  the  United  States  Civil-Service  Commission  contain  much 
interesting  information,  though  not  much  about  cities.  The  reports 
of  the  various  civil-service  commissions  in  cities  are  useful,  and  many 
articles  are  to  be  found  in  the  political  science  journals. 

86  Out  of  the  extensive  literature  brought  forth  within  the  last 
ten  years  on  the  commission  form  of  government  for  cHties  the 
following  may  be  noted  as  especially  useful :  Bradford,  Commis- 
sion Government  in  American  Cities  (New  York,  1911)  ;  Wood- 
ruff, ed.,  City  Government  by  Commission  (New  York,  1911)  ;' 
"  Commission  Government  in  American  Cities,"  Annals  of  the 
American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science  (Philadel- 
phia), November,   1911,  revised  in   1914  under  the  title  of  "Com- 


342  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

not  agree  on  exact  definitions.  But  the  essence  of  com- 
mission government  as  contrasted  with  the  mayor-and- 
council  form  is  easily  stated.  It  consists  in  the  union  of 
legislative  and  administrative  powers  in  the  hands  of  a 
single  governing  body  instead  of  the  separation  of  powers 
and  their  distribution  among  legislative,  executive,  and 
administrative  authorities.  Other  common  characteris- 
tics of  commission  government  will  be  noted  a  little  later, 
but  it  is  this  fundamental  departure  from  the  basic  theory 
on  which  the  mayor-and-council  plan  was  based  which 
constitutes  the  real  significance  of  the  new  movement  be- 
gun in  1 901. 

Curiously  enough  this  striking  abandonment  of  a  time 
honored  shibboleth  occurred  not  as  the  result  of  a  grow- 
ing conviction  on  the  part  of  students  of  municipal  gov- 
ernment that  the  old  theory  should  be  discarded,  for  but  a 
year  or  two  before  the  establishment  of  the  first  instance 
of  a  city  commission,  the  National  Municipal  League, 
one  of  the  most  influential  and  authoritative  of  reform 
associations  concerned  with  city  government,  endorsed 
in  its  municipal  program  the  mayor-and-council  plan  based 
on  the  strong  mayor  idea.  The  origin  of  commission 
government  was  an  accidental,  not  a  consciously  directed 
occurrence.     When  the  City  of  Galveston,  Texas,  was 

mission  Government  and  the  City-Manager  Plan."  A  collection  of 
commission  government  charters  is  to  be  found  in  Beard,  ed.,  A 
Loose-Leaf  Digest  of  Short  Ballot  Charters  (New  York,  1911). 
Bruere,  The  New  City  Government  (New  York,  1912),  presents 
the  results  of  a  survey  of  ten  commission  governed  cities,  and  a 
Census  volume  of  1916  makes  a  comparative  financial  study  of 
typical  commission  governed  cities  with  cities  of  approximately  the 
same  size  operating  under  the  mayor-and-council  form.  Pamphlet 
and  periodical  literature  on  the  subject  is  now  very  extensive,  to 
which  references  can  be  found  in  the  books  first  mentioned,  and  in 
Munro,  Bibliography  of  Municipal  Government  (Cambridge,  1915). 
as  well  as  in  the  files  of  the  political  science  journals,  particularly 
the  National  Municipal  Review. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      343 

swept  in  1900  by  a  tropical  storm  that  all  but  wiped  out 
the  city,  the  regular  city  government,  inefficient  in  or- 
dinary times,  simply  ceased  to  function.  It  was  unable 
to  meet  the  emergency  and  the  business  men  of  the  city 
who  were  the  most  vitally  concerned  in  rehabilitation  re- 
quested that  the  affairs  of  the  city  be  put  by  the  legislature 
into  the  hands  of  a  committee  or  commission  of  business 
men. 

This  action  was  at  the  time  regarded  as  an  emergency 
measure,  for  which  precedents  could  be  found  in  other 
states,  notably  in  the  action  of  the  Tennessee  legislature 
in  1878  in  putting  Memphis  under  a  commission  at  the 
time  of  the  yellow-fever  epidemic.  The  first  charter  pro- 
vided that  three  of  the  five  commissioners  should  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor,  but  the  courts  holding  that  this 
was  contrary  to  a  provision  of  the  constitution  requiring 
the  local  election  of  local  officers,  all  five  were  subse- 
quently made  elective. 

The  new  city  government  proved  so  satisfactory  to  the 
citizens  of  Galveston  that  even  after  the  emergency  caused 
by  the  storm  was  past  there  was  no  inclination  to  return  to 
the  old  form  which  had  been  in  every  way  unsatisfactory. 
It  was  the  continuation  of  this  new  type  in  ordinary  con- 
ditions, therefore,  rather  than  its  adoption  to  meet  an 
emergency  which  challenged  the  attention  of  students  of 
municipal  government.  The  main  feature  of  the  Gal- 
veston plan,  as  it  came  to  be  called,  was  the  election  at 
large  every  two  years  of  five  commissioners  in  whom 
were  concentrated  the  ordinance  power,  the  financial  pow- 
ers, and  the  administrative  powers  of  the  city.  One  of 
the  commissioners  was  to  be  elected  mayor-president  but 
with  no  independent  administrative  powers  and  no  veto 
power.  Each  of  the  commissioners  was  put  in  charge, 
by  action  of  the  commission  itself,  of  a  special  depart- 


344  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ment  of  administration  for  which  he  was  responsible, 
but  the  commission  as  a  whole  was  responsible,  theoreti- 
cally at  least,  for  administration  as  well  as  legislation. 

The  commission  plan  proved  so  satisfactory  in  Gal- 
veston that  other  Texas  cities  soon  applied  for  charters 
based  on  that  plan,  and  in  1907  the  new  type  of  govern- 
ment made  its  appearance  for  the  first  time  outside  of 
Texas  when  Des  Moines,  Iowa,  adopted  a  commission 
charter  under  a  permissive  statute  of  the  same  year.  The 
Des  Moines  charter  contained  some  new  features,  which 
although  not  originally  part  of  the  commission  plan,  have 
been  so  generally  followed  in  later  adoptions  of  the  plan 
that  they  are  sometimes  considered  as  characteristics 
thereof.  The  features  which  Des  Moines  added  to  the 
essentials  of  the  Galveston  plan  include  the  non-partisan 
elections,  the  initiative,  the  referendum,  and  the  recall, 
the  object  of  the  last  three  of  these  features  being  to  off- 
set the  concentration  of  all  power  in  the  hands  of  five 
men,  which  was  believed  to  be  dangerous.  Provision  was 
also  made  for  the  application  of  the  civil-service  merit 
system  to  the  administrative  service.  Since  1907  the 
plan  has  spread  with  great  rapidity  to  every  part  of  the 
United  States,  especially  in  the  home-rule  charter  states, 
until  in  the  last  few  years  it  has  been  somewhat  checked 
by  the  origin  and  development  of  the  city-manager  plan. 

The  merits  of  commission  government  are  obvious,  and 
the  testimony  as  to  its  superiority  over  the  old  mayor-and- 
council  form  is  overwhelming  from  the  cities  that  have 
changed  from  the  one  to  the  other.  The  principle  of  con- 
centrating responsibility  and  powers  is  too  sound  to  be 
open  to  serious  question.  Of  course  commission  govern- 
ment has  not  done  all  that  its  enthusiastic  advocates 
claimed  for  it.  But  what  has  been  accomplished  is  a 
sufficient  vindication  of  the  bold  experiment  begun  twenty 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     345 

years  ago  in  Galveston.  Instances  of  cities  abandoning 
commission  government  and  going  back  to  the  old  form 
are  so  rare  as  to  be  noteworthy  and  the  fact  that  where 
agitation  for  such  a  return  does  arise  it  is  nearly  al- 
ways directly  traceable  to  the  old  crowd  of  officeholders 
under  the  earlier  form  is  perhaps  as  strong  a  testimonial 
as  could  be  desired  in  favor  of  the  new  type. 

Two  characteristics  of  commission  government,  how- 
ever, are  especially  worth  noting,  in  view  of  the  latest  de- 
velopment in  American  city  government,  the  city-manager 
plan.  In  the  first  place,  the  tendency  has  been  to  consider 
the  commissioners  primarily  as  administrators  of  their 
particular  departments,  so  that  the  reelection  of  a  com- 
missioner was  most  likely  to  turn  on  his  record  as  head  of 
the  street,  fire,  police  or  other  department,  rather  than 
on  the  record  of  the  commission  as  a  whole,  though  the 
latter  in  theory  of  law  was  ultimately  responsible  for  ad- 
ministration as  well  as  legislation.  Consequently  the 
commissioner  devoted  his  time  and  energy  chiefly  to  the 
conduct  of  his  department,  as  that  was  the  work  for  which 
he  considered  he  was  paid.  Below  him  he  might  employ 
subordinate  technical  officials,  but  he  directly  supervised 
the  details  of  administration.  Consequently  the  public 
was  inclined  to  choose  a  man  because  of  his  alleged  or 
reputed  efficiency  in  a  particular  field  of  administration, 
rather  than  because  of  his  qualifications  as  a  representative 
officer.  This  has  proved  to  be  the  case  quite  generally 
even  in  those  cities  where  commissioners  are  not  directly 
elected  to  special  posts,  while  in  many  cities  this  concep- 
tion has  been  legalized  by  electing  commissioners  to 
special  departments.  We  have  then  an  illustration  of  the 
attempt  to  fill  administrative  posts  requiring  peculiar  tech- 
nical or  professional  qualifications  by  popular  election. 
The  futility  of  such  an  attempt  is  almost  too  obvious  to 


346  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

need  comment,  yet  we  have  seen  that  it  is  characteristic 
of  county  government  as  well  as  of  state  government 
in  this  country,  and  in  this  country  alone. 

The  other  feature  of  commission  government  that  has 
a  direct  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  significance  of  the 
city-manager  plan  lies  in  the  fact  that  inasmuch  as  the 
entire  administrative  activity  of  the  city  is  a  whole  and 
cannot  be  divided  off  into  mutually  independent  depart- 
ments there  is  need  of  a  single  administrative  head,  in- 
stead of  a  three  or  five  headed  administration  such  as  the 
commission  government  provides.  Multi-headed  execu- 
tives have  not  proven  successful  in  the  history  of  govern- 
ments and  even  the  relatively  short  annals  of  commission- 
government  history  can  show  unfortunate  instances  of 
interdepartmental  rivalry  and  jealousies  that  have  cost 
the  city  dear  because  there  was  no  unifying  head  to  com- 
pel cooperation.  This  weakness  has  been  felt  to  a  certain 
extent  in  many  cities. 

On  the  theoretical  side,  therefore,  it  may  be  said  that 
commission  government,  in  spite  of  its  advance  over  the 
complicated  and  diffused  mayor-and-council  government 
presents  two  serious  weaknesses  namely  in  the  attempt  to 
elect  technical  administrative  officers  and  in  the  failure 
to  provide  a  centralized  administrative  system.  It  is  aL 
curious  fact  that  the  propagandists  of  commission  gov- 
ernment dwelt  with  insistence  on  the  analogy  between  this 
new  form  of  city  government  and  private,  corporate  bus- 
iness organization.  While  they  likened,  with  considerable 
reason,  the  city  commissioners  to  the  directors  of  a  cor- 
poration, they  failed  to  note  that  private  corporations  de- 
pend for  their  success  quite  as  much,  if  indeed  not  more, 
on  the  president  or  general  manager  who  has  charge  of 
carrying  out  the  policies  of  the  directors  as  on  the  di- 
rectors themselves,  and  that  the  commission  plan  of  gov- 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION     347 

ernment  does  not  adopt  that  essential  feature  of  private 
corporate  organization. 

One  other  consideration  with  regard  to  commission  gov- 
ernment is  worth  mentioning.  Is  commission  govern- 
ment adapted  to  large  cities,  and  if  so  how  does  it  happen 
that  none  of  the  largest  cities  have  turned  to  that  type? 
Considering  the  second  query  first  it  may  be  noted  in  the 
first  place  that  the  largest  cities  in  the  United  States  are 
not  as  a  rule  free  to  adopt  their  own  charters.  In  the 
second  place  the  introduction  of  commission  government 
has  nearly  always  been  opposed  by  the  politicians  in  power 
under  the  old  form,  and  the  larger  the  city  the  more 
powerful  is  this  opposition.  Thirdly,  the  new  form  of 
government  is  spreading,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  to  ever 
larger  cities,  and  has  been  seriously  considered  in  some 
of  the  cities  of  the  first  class.  In  answer  to  the  first  query 
it  may  be  said  that  whatever  is  worth  while  in  the  prin- 
ciples upon  which  commission  government  operates  is 
equally  applicable  to  the  larger  and  to  the  smaller  cities. 
Simplification,  concentration  of  responsibility,  and  con- 
sequently greater  possibilities  of  citizen  control  are  desid- 
erata for  the  metropolis  as  well  as  for  the  hamlet,  and  to 
the  extent  that  commission  government  offers  these  im- 
provements over  the  old  mayor-and-council  form,  to  that 
extent  is  it  adapted  to  all  cities  no  matter  what  their  size. 
The  City-Manager  Plan.36 —  The  city-manager  plan, 
as  has  been  stated,  is  a  product  of  the  last  decade.  Its 
beginnings  seem  to  be  found  in  an  experiment  inaugurated 

38  Two  books  dealing  with  the  city-manager  plan  especially  worth 
noting  are  Toulmin,  The  City  Manager  (New  York,  1915),  and 
Rightor,  The  City  Manager  in  Dayton  (New  York,  1919).  For 
discussions  of  the  history  and  theory  of  the  city-manager  plan  ref- 
erence may  be  made  to  the  author's  Applied  City  Government  (New 
York,  1914),  and  two  pamphlets  by  the  author  in  the  University 
of  Texas  Bulletins,  Municipal  Research  Series,  entitled  "  A  Model 


348  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

by  the  city  of  Staunton,  Virginia,  in  1909,  when  by  local 
ordinance  the  city  government,  then  under  the  mayor-and- 
council  form  prescribed  by  the  constitution,  provided  for 
an  officer  designated  as  manager.  In  191 1  the  Board  of 
Trade  of  Lockport,  New  York,  presented  to  the  legislature 
a  charter  law  providing  for  the  city-manager  feature  com- 
bined with  commission  organization.  But  the  proposal 
failed  of  adoption  and  it  remained  for  the  city  of  Sum- 
ter, South  Carolina,  to  inaugurate  the  first  trial  of  the 
commission-manager  plan,  adopted  in  19 12  and  put  into 
effect  on  the  first  of  January  of  the  following  year.  In 
19 1 3  a  dozen  other  cities  adopted  the  new  plan,  chief 
among  which  was  the  city  of  Dayton,  Ohio,  which  by 
reason  of  its  size,  116,557  in  1910,  and  by  reason  of  the 
publicity  given  to  its  charter,  came  to  serve  as  the  classic 
example  of  the  commission-manager  type. 

The  Dayton  charter,  whose  adoption,  like  that  of  Gal- 
veston twelve  years  before,  was  aided  by,  if  not  entirely 
due  to  the  disastrous  flood  of  March,  191 3,  provided  as 
the  basis  of  its  government  a  commission  modeled  on  the 
accepted  lines  of  commission  government,  namely  five 
commissioners  chosen  at  large  on  a  non-partisan  nomina- 
tion and  election  system  in  whom  all  powers  of  local  gov- 
ernment were  concentrated,  the  mayor  having  virtually  no 

Charter  for  Texas  Cities"  1913,  and  "What  Is  the  City-Manager 
Plan?"  1915.  The  New  Municipal  Program  of  the  National  Mu- 
nicipal League  (New  York,  1919),  contains  a  presentation  and  dis- 
cussion of  a  city-manager  model  charter.  A  special  volume  of 
the  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Sci- 
ence, entitled  "  Commission  Government  and  the  City-Manager 
Plan"  (Philadelphia,  1914),  contains  material  on  the  city-manager 
plan.  Periodical  and  pamphlet  literature  on  the  city-manager  plan 
is  now  very  extensive,  special  reference  being  made  to  the  publica- 
tions of  the  National  Short  Ballot  Organization,  to  the  National 
Municipal  Review,  and  to  the  American  City.  The  Year  Books  of 
the  City-Managers'  Association  contain  much  interesting  material. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      349 

special  powers  except  those  of  presiding  at  the  meetings. 
The  initiative,  referendum,  and  recall  were  included  on 
the  accepted  Des  Moines  model.  The  new  feature  of  the 
manager  was  incorporated  in  the  charter  by  provisions 
requiring  the  selection  by  the  commission  of  a  city  man- 
ager in  whose  hands  should  be  centralized  the  immediate 
control  of  the  entire  administration,  the  commission  be- 
ing expressly  forbidden  to  interfere  with  the  details  of 
administration.  The  manager  was  made  removable  at 
any  time  by  the  commission,  as  well  as  subject  to  recall.37 
The  manager  was  given  the  power  of  appointment  and 
removal  of  all  heads  of  departments  and  their  immediate 
subordinates  subject  only  to  a  charter  requirement  that 
the  appointments  must  be  on  the  basis  of  merit  and  fit- 
ness alone.  All  subordinate  officials,  except  the  city  clerk, 
are  appointed  and  removed  by  the  manager  also,  but  sub- 
ject to  the  regulations  of  the  civil-service  board,  which 
is  chosen  by  the  commission.  In  addition  to  his  powers 
of  appointment  and  removal,  which  insure  to  the  manager 
the  exercise  of  the  power  of  control  and  direction  over 
all  departments,  as  directed  by  the  charter,  the  manager  is 
also  designated  by  the  charter  as  the  authority  to  see  that 
the  laws  and  ordinances  are  enforced.  Other  important 
features  of  the  Dayton  charter  are  the  provisions  relating 
to  the  organization  of  departments,  of  which  five  were 
originally  provided  for,  subject  to  alteration  by  the  com- 
mission, and  the  financial  provisions  relating  to  the  bud- 
get, the  borrowing  power,  and  accounting  and  purchas- 
ing methods.     But  these  are  not  necessary  features  of 

37  This  feature  of  the  Dayton  charter  was  an  unfortunate  viola- 
tion of  the  principle  of  the  complete  and  absolute  responsibility  of 
the  manager  to  the  commission  alone,  which  has  fortunately  been 
followed  in  relatively  few  of  the  later  commission-manager  char- 
ters. See  James,  "  Defects  in  the  Dayton  Charter,"  National 
Municipal  Review,  January,  1914,  p.  95. 


350  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  manager  plan  nor  are  they  restricted,  of  course,  in 
their  application  to  commission-manager  cities. 

This,  in  essence,  constitutes  the  commission-manager 
form.  It  is  well  to  point  out  here,  however,  that  there 
are  a  number  of  so-called  city-manager  cities  which  do 
not  operate  under  such  a  charter  but  in  which  an  official 
known  as  the  manager  is  provided  by  ordinance,  either  in 
connection  with  a  commission  or  even,  as  originally  in 
Staunton,  in  combination  with  the  old  mayor-and-council 
form.  But  as  the  weight  of  progressive  opinion  is  all 
in  favor  of  the  commission-manager  charter  and  most  of 
the  cities  that  have  since  adopted  the  city  manager  fea- 
ture have  followed  the  Sumter  model,  we  may  use  the 
term  city-manager  plan  as  properly  designating  the  com- 
bination of  commission  government  with  the  manager 
feature. 

As  the  spread  of  the  commission-manager  type  of  city 
government  since  19 12  has  been  even  more  rapid  than 
was  that  of  commission  government  in  the  first  eight  years 
of  its  history,  and  as  a  number  of  cities  have  changed 
from  the  commission  form  to  the  commission-manager 
form,  it  is  well  to  recognize  that  this  new  type  of  city 
government  has  an  importance  greater  than  that  indicated 
by  considering  merely  the  relatively  small  number  of 
American  cities  that  are  now  actually  operating  under  it. 
Of  considerable  significance,  furthermore,  is  the  fact  that 
the  National  Municipal  League  in  its  new  Municipal  Pro- 
gram of  19 1 6  endorsed  the  commission-manager  form 
and  approved  a  model  charter  based  on  that  principle.38 

38  As  early  as  1913  a  committee  of  the  League,  on  commission- 
government,  endorsed  the  city-manager  feature  in  combination  with 
commission  government  and  in  the  same  year  a  committee  on  mu- 
nicipal program  was  appointed  which  reported  the  next  year  in 
favor  of  this  general  principle.  The  publicity  given  to  the  report 
of  this  committee  and  to  the  approval  of  the  manager  plan  by  the 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      351 

In  order  to  understand  the  relation  between  the  com- 
mission-manager and  its  immediate  predecessor,  the  com- 
mission form,  it  is  only  necessary  to  refer  briefly  to  the 
discussion  of  the  latter  type  given  above.  The  advan- 
.tagps  of  commission  government  over  the  older  form  are 
retained.  But  the  two  principal  weaknesses-  of  commis- 
sion government  noted  above,  namely  the  selection  of  men 
for  technical  administrative  duties  by  popular  election  in- 
stead of  by  appointment  on  the  basis  of  special  qualifica- 
tions and  the  lack  of  administrative  centralization  are 
both  cured  by  the  manager  plan.  The  manager,  chosen 
because  of  expert  qualifications  and  not  because  of  vote- 
getting  ability  is  the  real  head  of  the  administration. 
Through  his  power  of  appointment  and  removal  he  can 
control  the  entire  administrative  machinery  and  insure 
that  harmony  in  the  administration  which  commission 
government  did  not  provide.  The  commissioners,  in- 
stead of  being  concerned  with  administrative  details  of 
which  they  are  necessarily  ignorant,  are  concerned  only 
with  the  determination  of  general  policies  and  the  control 
of  the  manager  who  rs  completely  responsible  to  them. 

It  is  not  possible  here  to  go  farther  into  a  discussion 
of  the  theoretical  advantages  and  objections  to  the  city- 
manager  plan.  It  may  simply  be  pointed  out  that,  unlike 
commission  government,  it  applies  as  completely  as  pos- 
sible to  city  government  the  principles  of  private  corporate 
business  management  and  that  it  is  simply  extending  to 
city  government  as  a  whole  the  long  established  principles 
on  which  our  public-school  systems  are  so  generally  run, 
namely  a  general  representative  policy-determining  board 

League  in  1915  served  in  no  small  measure  to  stimulate  and  direct 
the  interest  of  municipal-reform  bodies  in  the  new  movement  even 
before  the  final  publication  of  the  report  on  1916  and  its  appear- 
ance in  book  form  in  1919  under  the  title  of  A  New  Municipal 
Program. 


352  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

operating  through  an  expert  administrator,  the  superin- 
tendent. There  is,  therefore,  nothing  either  untried  or 
un-American  in  this  latest  type  of  city  government.  So 
far  as  practical  experience  throws  any  light  on  the  sub- 
ject, adopting  the  old  adage  that  the  proof  of  the  pud^ng 
is  in  the  eating,  we  may  say  that  the  overwhelming  evi- 
dence so  far  is  that  it  tastes  decidedly  good.  Perhaps, 
to  carry  the  figure  of  speech  a  little  farther,  it  is  too  early 
to  come  to  any  conclusion  as  to  how  the  pudding  will  be 
digested  and  assimilated.  The  chief  danger  lies,  prob- 
ably, in  the  tendency  to  make  extravagant  claims  for  this 
new  departure  and  to  forget  that  the  fundamental  con- 
ditions of  an  active  and  continuous  citizen  interest  are  as 
necessary  for  the  success  of  one  scheme  of  government 
as  for  another.  If  the  city  manager  plan  tends  to  arouse 
and  sustain  such  an  interest,  it  would  therein  alone  justify 
its  existence,  and  if  in  turn  this  interest  can  operate  more 
effectively  upon  the  manager  type  than  upon  the  other 
types,  it  needs  no  further  apology.  Time  alone  will  tell 
whether  either  or  both  of  these  possibilities  will  be  per- 
manently realized. 

Municipal  Courts39 

The  judicial  organization  of  our  cities  is  just  as  much 
a  part  of  the  American  municipal  system  as  is  the  judi- 
cial organization  of  the  county  a  part  of  the  county  sys- 
tem.    As  such  it  deserves  consideration  in  any  discussion 

39  There  is  almost  no  mention  in  the  literature  of  municipal  gov- 
ernment of  the  system  of  municipal  courts.  Goodnow,  City  Gov- 
ernment in  the  United  States  (New  York,  1904),  pp.  204-214,  de- 
votes some  space  to  this  subject.  Beard,  American  City 
Government  (New  York,  1912),  discusses  the  police  courts  and 
some  special  courts,  pp.  173-184,  as  does  also  Zueblin,  American 
Municipal  Progress,  new  edition  (New  York,  1916),  pp.  149  ff.  The 
New  Municipal  Program  (New  York,  1919),  Chap,  xiii,  explains  the 
provisions  and  ourpose  of  the  model  act  establishing  a  municipal 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      353 

of  municipal  organization,  no  matter  how  brief,  and  yet 
most  works  on  American  city  government  are  wholly  silent 
on  the  subject.  As  a  matter  of  fact  county  courts,  as 
has  been  seen,  are  almost  without  exception  concerned 
only  with  the  application  of  state  laws,  while  city  courts 
are  charged,  on  the  criminal  side  at  least,  with  the  enforce- 
ment of  local  laws.  They  may  be  regarded,  therefore, 
as  local  courts  with  more  reason  than  the  county  courts. 

The  Development  of  Municipal  Courts. —  Orig- 
inally, as  has  been  noted  in  the  chapter  on  the  develop- 
ment of  local  government,  the  regular  municipal  officers 
acted  also  in  a  judicial  capacity,  the  mayor,  recorder,  and 
aldermen  functioning  as  justices  singly  and  acting  to- 
gether as  a  boroiigh  or  corporation  court  -with  a  jurisdic- 
tion coordinate  with  that  of  the  quarter  sessions  in  gen- 
eral civil  and  criminal  cases,  as  well  as  criminal  jurisdic- 
tion over  the  violation  of  local  ordinances.  After  the 
colonial  period,  however,  these  judicial  functions  came 
quite  generally  to  be  transferred  to  special  judicial  of- 
ficers, either  centrally  appointed  or  selected  by  the  coun- 
cil, the  mayor  and  aldermen  at  first  sharing  judicial  func- 
tions with  these  new  officers  and  then  losing  their  partici- 
pation altogether,  though  the  mayor  continued  for  a  long 
time,  in  som'e  instances  even  up  to  the  present,  to  occupy 
nominally  the  position  of  justice  of  the  peace.  The 
recorder  tended  to  become  a  purely  judicial  officer  and  is 
found  as  such  in  many  cities  to-day. 

The  movement  for  popular  election  of  officers  extended 
to  the  judicial  officers  in  the  cities  as  well  as  in  the  coun- 
ties and  the  petty  judicial  officers  in  the  cities  acquired  or 

court  approved  by  the  American  Judicature  Society  and  published  as 
Bulletins  IV  A  and  IV  B  of  that  association.  Dillon,  Law  of  Munic- 
ipal Corporations,  fifth  edition  (Boston,  1911),  devotes  a  chapter  to 
municipal  courts,  Chap.  viii. 


354  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

retained  the.  character  of  local  officers  in  so  far  as  their 
election  occurred  by  the  municipal  directorate. 

The  Present  Form  of  Municipal  Courts. —  To-day 
in  the  smaller  cities  justices  of  the  peace  usually  continue 
to  function  as  committing  officers  but  in  addtion  there  is 
usually  also  a  local  court,  presided  over  by  a  recorder 
or  magistrate , and  called  recorder's  court  or  corporation 
court  or  police  court  to  try  violations  of  municipal  ordi- 
nances. In  the  larger  cities  misdemeanors  under  the  state 
laws  and  the  city  ordinances  are  commonly  tried  by  the 
police  courts,  presided  over  by  so-called  police  justices  or 
magistrates,  who  act  also  as  examining  and  committing 
magistrates  for  more  serious  offenses,  while  a  corpora- 
tion court  or  municipal  court  or  city  court  is  frequently 
provided  as  a  court  of  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction  co- 
ordinate with  the  county  courts  or  other  lower  courts  of 
record  provided  in  the  judicial  system  of  the  state. 

The  administration  of  judicial  police  functions  in  the 
larger  cities  has  been  the  subject  of  widespread  criticism. 
Its  importance  to  the  city  is  obvious  since  effective 
action  of  the  city  police  in  preserving  law  and  order  is 
impassible  under  a  lax  or  corrupt  system  of  police  magis- 
trates. The  worst  examples  of  police  corruption  and 
graft  have  usually  been  found  to  be  intimately  connected 
with  corrupt  and  controlled  magistrates  or  police  judges. 
Popular  election  of  these  judicial  officers  has  properly 
been  denounced  as  tending  to  further  this  unsatisfactory 
condition  of  affairs  since  it  is  found  that  usually  the  only 
element  in  the  city's  population  interested  in  the  candidates 
for  election  to  these  posts  are  the  vicious  and  criminal 
elements,  who  therefore  find  it  easy  to  select  persons  sub- 
servient to  their  interests.  Appointment  by  the  mayor  is 
sometimes  the  method  of  selection,  and  in  some  states 
the  police  magistrates  are  appointed  by   the  governor, 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      355 

while  in  Virginia  they  are  selected  by  joint  action  of  the 
two  houses  of  the  legislature. 

In  so  far  as  municipal  magistrates  and  judges  are  con- 
cerned in  trying  violations  of  municipal  ordinances  they 
are  really  part  of  the  local  machinery  of  government  and 
should  be  locally  selected,  though  not  by  the  process  of 
popular  election.  But  where  they  also  constitute  part  of 
the  state  judicial  machinery  for  the  trial  of  cases  involv- 
ing state  law,  as  is  usually  the  case  in  larger  cities,  their 
ability  and  integrity  are  obviously  matters  of  direct  con- 
cern to  the  state  at  large.  Local  appointment  with  power 
of  removal  by  central  authorities  would  seem  to  provide 
a  means  of  safe-guarding  the  interests  of  both  the  city  and 
the  state. 

It  is  in  the  larger  cities  that  the  system  of  municipal 
courts,  especially  on  the  criminal  side  has  proven  most 
unsatisfactory.  It  is  there  also  that  some  of  the  most  in- 
teresting experiments  have  been  undertaken  in  the  field  of 
judicial  reform.  This  has  occurred  in  the  establishment 
of  special  courts,  or  rather  special  branches  of  the  munici- 
pal courts  in  a  number  of  the  larger  cities  of  the  country. 
Among  these  may  be  mentioned  the  juvenile  courts  for 
special  treatment  of  minors  charged  with  misdemeanors 
or  crimes,  made  famous  by  Judge  Lindsey  of  Denver 
and  now  found  in  a  large  number  of  cities. 

Night  courts,  for  the  trial  of  persons  arrested  at  a 
late  hour,  as  found  in  New  York  City,  have  proven  their 
worth  in  giving  a  speedy  trial  to  persons,  many  of  whom 
are  entitled  to  a  discharge  and  who  would  otherwise  have 
to  spend  the  night  in  jail.  The  speeder's  court,  a  branch 
of  the  Chicago  municipal  court,  handles  expeditiously  and 
effectively  the  enormous  number  of  violations  of  traffic 
laws. 

Then  there  are  domestic  relations  courts  found  in  New 


356  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

York  City,  Chicago,  and  other  large  cities,  dealing  with 
questions  of  desertion,  non-support,  and  other  family 
difficulties.  Branch  courts  of  arbitration  and  conciliation 
such  as  are  found  in  New  York,  Chicago,  Cleveland,  and 
elsewhere  accomplish  in  the  civil  field  what  the  special 
courts  mentioned  above  accomplish  in  the  criminal  field. 
Special  kinds  of  cases  are  taken  care  of  by  judges  who  de- 
velop, if  they  do  not  have  at  the  outset,  a  familiarity  and 
grasp  of  the  special  problems  involved.  Justice  is  more 
certain  and  rapid,  and  regard  for  the  law  is  developed  in 
the  citizenry. 

The  reform  of  the  municipal  courts  in  the  largest  cities 
is  now  receiving  a  great  deal  of  attention.  Chicago  was 
the  pioneer  in  securing  what  is  known  as  the  organized 
court,  and  Cleveland,  New  York,  and  other  large  cities 
have  followed  to  varying  degrees  the  same  model.  In 
1919  Detroit  reorganized  her  criminal  court  in  a  striking 
manner.40  The  American  Judicature  Society  has  pub- 
lished a  model  judicature  act  for  a  metropolitan  district  41 
which  proposes  a  consolidation  of  all  courts  except  appel- 
late courts  within  the  district  into  one  court,  divided  into 
five  main  divisions  based  upon  the  nature  of  the  business 
to  be  transacted.  There  are  to  be  a  chief  justice  and  five 
presiding  judges,  one  for  each  division,  who  together  with 
an  additional  judge  constitute  a  judicial  council,  which  is 
the  governing  body  of  the  court  regulating  practice  and 
procedure  and  generally  managing  the  business  of  the 
court  and  all  divisions  and  branches.     The  chief  justice  is 

40  Harley,  "  Detroit  Reforms  Its  Criminal  Courts,"  National  Mu- 
nicipal Review,  June,  1920,  p.  345. 

41  Bulletins  IV  A  and  IV  B  of  the  American  Judicature  Society, 
1914.  See  also,  Harley,  "  The  Model  Municipal  Court,"  National 
Municipal  Review,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  57,  and  Harley,  "  Business  Manage- 
ment for  City  Courts"  in  the  New  Municipal  Program  (New  York, 
1919). 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  ORGANIZATION      357 

the  chief  executive,  subject  to  the  approval  of  his  man- 
agement by  a  majority  of  the  senior  judges.  These  fea- 
tures are  familiar  aspects  of  judicial  organization  in  Euro- 
pean countries.  The  more  interesting  features  of  the  act 
relate  to  the  method  of  selecting  the  judges,  aspects  of 
the  whole  problem  on  which  agreement  could  not  be  ob- 
tained. Four  methods  are  suggested,  therefore,  as  fol- 
lows :  appointment  by  the  governor  with  removal  by  the 
legislature;  reelection  of  judges  "  on  their  records  "  with- 
out competition  by  putting  on  the  ballots  after  the  name 
of  an  incumbent  the  query  "  shall  he  be  continued  in  of- 
fice?"; appointment  by  the  chief  justice,  who  is  to  be 
elected  for  a  short  term,  for  a  definite  period  with  submis- 
sion to  a  referendum  at  the  end  of  that  period  as  to  his 
continuation;  and  appointment  by  the  chief  justice  subject 
to  removal  by  the  legislature  or  by  the  judicial  council. 

It  is  not  merely  in  the  metropolitan  cities,  however, 
that  greater  attention  should  be  paid  to  the  question  of 
judicial  organization  in  the  cities.  One  of  the  character- 
istic functions  of  the  city  is  the  exercise  of  the  local  po- 
lice power  and  unless  the  judicial  machinery  provided 
for  enforcing  that  power  is  properly  manned  and  run 
this  important  power  will  be  rendered  largely  nugatory.42 

42  For  a  brief  description  and  criticism  of  the  system  of  judicial 
administration  in  the  cities  of  Illinois  see  Bulletin  No.  10  prepared 
by  the  Illinois  Legislative  Reference  Bureau  for  the  Constitutional 
Convention,  1920. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  CITY  GOVERNMENT  i 

The  Legal  Nature  and  Position  of  the  City 

The  Powers  of  the  City. —  The  American  city,  as  has 
already  been  pointed  out,  is  a  public  corporation  enjoying 
the  corporate  powers  characteristic  of  such  bodies,  such 
as  the  right  to  acquire,  hold,  and  dispose  of  property,  to 
sue  and  be  sued,  to  enter  into  contracts  for  the  perform- 
ance of  authorized  functions,  to  have  a  corporate  seal,  and 
to  enjoy  the  right  of  perpetual  succession.  These  are 
powers  that  are  ordinarily  derived  under  the  provisions 
of  the  law  or  the  constitution  that  make  cities  bodies 
politic  and  corporate,  and  in  some  states  the  courts  have 
derived  still  other  powers  from  the  corporate  nature 
of  cities,  such  as  the  right  to  borrow  money  or  even  to 
issue  negotiable  instruments  of  indebtedness.  It  must 
be  remembered,  however,  that  none  of  these  powers  is 
regarded  as  inherent  in  cities  but  that  they,  as  well  as  all 
other  powers  exercised  by  cities,  must  be  granted  to  them 

xThis  chapter  is  largely  adapted  from  the  author's  Municipal 
Functions  (New  York,  1917).  Other  works  on  this  general  sub- 
ject include,  Munro,  Principles  and  Methods  of  Municipal  Admin- 
istration (New  York,  1916)  ;  Zueblin,  American  Municipal  Progress, 
second  edition  (New  York,  1916)  ;  Fairlie,  Municipal  Administra- 
tion (New  York,  1901);  and  Beard,  American  City  Government 
(New  York,  1912).  Of  great  value  are  the  Census  volumes  deal- 
ing with  general  statistics  of  cities,  and  the  annual  volumes  on 
financial  statistics  of  cities  having  a  population  of  over  30,000.  Ref- 
erences to  special  phases  of  municipal  functions  will  be  given  under 
the  appropriate  discussions.  Munro,  Bibliography  of  Municipal 
Government  (Cambridge,  1915),  gives  an  exhaustive  bibliography  up 
to  that  date. 

3$ 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       359 

by  the  constitution  or  the  laws,  either  by  express  terms  or 
by  fair  implication  from  powers  so  granted  as  being  es- 
sential to  the  declared  objects  and  purposes  of  the  cor- 
poration. In  general  the  courts  of  the  United  States  have 
applied  the  doctrine  of  strict  construction  to  grants  of 
powers  to  municipal  corporations  much  as  they  have 
applied  it  to  private  corporations,  especially  where  the 
powers  claimed  for  cities  might  impose  public  burdens 
or  affect  the  liberty  or  property  of  the  individual.2 

Not  only,  then,  may  the  city  exercise  only  such  powers 
as  have  been  clearly  granted,  but  these  powers,  though 
once  granted,  may  at  any  time  be  modified  or  taken  away 
by  the  state,  which  means  under  our  American  constitu- 
tional law  by  the  legislature,  unless  the  constitutions  pro- 
tect cities  in  certain  of  their  powers.  In  this  respect  cities 
are  worse  off  than  private  corporations  under  our  law, 
for  while  private  corporate  charters,  though  enacted  by 
the  legislatures,  are  viewed  as  contracts  whose  obligation 
cannot  under  the  state  and  Federal  prohibitions  be  im- 
paired, municipal  charters  are  laws  and  as  such  subject  to 
amendment  or  repeal.  Furthermore  cities  have  been 
accorded  the  protection  of  the  "  due  process  of  law  " 
guarantee  in  the  Federal  Constitution  in  only  a  few  in- 
stances and  to  very  limited  degree  and  have  been  regarded 
as  quite  without  the  scope  of  the  provision  in  the  Federal 
Constitution  relating  to  the  equal  protection  of  the  laws, 
both  of  which  safeguards  have  been  invoked  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  by  private  corporations.3 

As  a  result  of  these  two  fundamental  characteristics 
of  the  position  of  the  American  city,  namely  the  strict 

2  See  Dillon,  Municipal  Corporations,  Chap.  vii. 

8  For  a  discussion  of  the  application  of  the  Federal  guarantees 
enumerated  above  to  the  protection  of  cities  see,  McBain,  The  Law 
and  Practice  of  Municipal  Home  Rule,  pp.  17-28. 


360  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

doctrine  of  express  powers  and  the  lack  of  any  constitu- 
tional protection  of  the  rights  of  cities,  combined  with 
the  practice  of  the  legislatures  to  grant  powers  in  a  limited 
and  minute  fashion  there  developed  the  situation,  charac- 
teristic of  the  American  system,  that  the  city  became  com- 
pletely the  creature  of  the  legislature.  In  England,  it  will 
be  remembered,  cities  were  incorporated,  until  the  reforms 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  by  the  crown  and  enjoyed  pow- 
ers which  could  be  legally  taken  away  only  by  judicial 
process.  It  is  true  that  with  the  complete  ascendancy  of 
the  Parliament  over  the  King  the  cities  became  subject  in 
every  way  to  the  plenary  power  of  the  legislature  and  new 
powers  were  granted  by  legislation,  while  even  incorpora- 
tion of  new  boroughs  though  nominally  performed  by  an 
act  of  the  Crown,  had,  after  the  legislation  of  1835,  to  be 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  determined  by  Par- 
liament. But  although  English  cities  derive  their  powers 
to-day  from  the  legislature,  Parliament  has  followed  the 
plan  of  extending  powers  in  broad  terms  and  has  not  at- 
tempted to  exercise  a  minute  control.  In  France,  on  the 
other  hand,  cities  are  operating  under  a  general  grant  of 
power  to  regulate  their  own  affairs,  subject  to  limitations 
prescribed  in  the  law.  In  both  these  countries,  therefore, 
cities  are  not  under  the  complete  tutelage  of  the  legisla4 
ture  as  they  came  to  be  in  the  United  States  by  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century. 

In  order  to  remedy  the  unfortunate  situation  that  grew 
out  of  the  complete  domination  of  cities  by  state  legisla- 
tures and  the  exercise  of  that  power  for  political  pur- 
poses instead  of  for  the  welfare  of  the  cities  themselves, 
constitutional  provisions  came  to  be  very  generally  adopted 
in  the  various  states  to  limit  the  power  of  control  of  the 
legislature.  We  have  already  seen  what  some  of  these 
were  that  related  specifically  to  the  matter  of  the  organ- 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      361 

ization  of  city  government.4  We  will  now  consider 
briefly  what  limitations  came  to  be  adopted  with  regard 
to  the  control  over  the  functions  or  activities  of  cities. 

Legislative   Control   over   Municipalities. —  In   the 
first  plav  'cmarked  again  that  many  of  the 

earlier  pr  rate  constituions  with  regard  to 

municipal  org  nsciously  intended  as 

legislature,  but  were 

^ason  in  imitation  of 

itutions,  or  in  some  cases 

restrictions  upon  the  cities  them- 

islative  power  over  them.     Some 

e  provi-  of  those  antedating  the  prohibition 

o»r  special  laws  in  the  Illinois  Constitution  of 

,  wa?  perhaps  the  earliest 

instance  of  the  adopti  .ich  a  provision  for  the  ex- 

gislative  power  over  cities, 
were,  however,  apparently  directed  against  legislative 
abuses  of  power.     For  ;t  part,  however,  these  have 

afe-guardb  for  cities.5     Among 

mentioned  prohibitions 

;s  by  the  legislature ;  prohibi- 

1  cal  taxes  for  other  than 

n  the  amount  of  taxation 

authorized  to  incur; 

ice    corporations    by 

^xtensi  edit;  prohibitions  on 

streets ;  and  prohibi- 

mchise  rights  in  the 

3n  legislative  abuses 
>ecial  legislation  for 

ip.  11. 


362  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

cities  which,  as  has  been  noted,  began  in  Ohio  in  185 1, 
and  then  spread  to  a  majority  of  the  other  states  as  well. 
Even  this  limitation,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out,  was 
very  largely  evaded  by  the  device  of  minute  classification 
and  in  other  ways,  and  when  not  in  practice  modified,  it 
often  proved  to  be  unsatisfactory  as  insisting  upon  uni- 
formity in  matters  where  uniformity  was  not  altogether 
desirable.  The  chief  value  of  this  limitation  to  cities  lay 
in  the  fact  that  when  the  legislature  was  unable  to  deal 
specifically  with  a  single  city  in  the  interests  of  local  or 
state  politics,  it  hesitated  to  enact  obnoxious  lav^s  applic- 
able to  all  cities  in  the  state  or  in  the  particular'  class.6 

Then  came  the  home-rule  charter  movement,  the  origin 
and  spread  of  which  has  already  been  considered  in  con- 
nection with  the  discussion  of  the  power  of  cities  in  the 
home-rule  charter  states  to  determine  their  own  frame- 
work of  government.  While,  as  has  been  pointed  out, 
there  can  be  little  danger  in  theory,  as  there-  has  been  little 
hesitation  in  practice  in  giving  cities  a  lar'ge  amount  of 
freedom  in  deciding  upon  the  particular  form  of  machinery 
they  wish  to  use  for  the  accomplishment  of  municipal 
functions,  both  theory  and  practice  present  very  distinct 
limitations  on  the  extent  to  which  it  is  possible  or  expedi- 
ent to  give  cities  complete  control  over  the  determination 
of  the  character  and  extent  of  powers  which  they  may  ex- 
ercise. For  while  the  form  of  city  government  was  not 
likely  to  be  a  matter  of  vital  concern  to  the  state  as  a  whole 
as  distinguished  from  the  city,  the  powers  of  the  city  gov- 
ernment might  well  be.  Hence  the  so-called  home-rule 
provisions  either  made  the  exercise  of  the  charter-making 
power  subject  to  other  constitutional  restrictions  on  cities 
or  to  general  laws,  whether  adopted  or  passed  before  or 

6  Dillon,  op.  cit.,  Chap,  v,  discusses  constitutional  prohibitions  on 
special  legislation. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      363 

after  the  local  action,  or  the  courts  themselves  tended  to 
restrict  the  freedom  of  the  cities  to  the  uncontrolled  exer- 
cise over  matters  of  "  local  "  concern  only.  In  the  de- 
termination of  the  fundamental  question  as  to  what  are 
matters  of  local  as  distinguished  from  general  or  state 
concern  the  courts  have  experienced  the  greatest  difficulty, 
and  small  wonder,  since  it  is  a  question  incapable  of  logi- 
cal or  exact  determination.  Among  the  more  important 
activities  in  connection  with  which  the  freedom  of  home- 
rule  cities  from  control  by  general  constitutional  or  sta- 
tutory provisions  has  been  considered  by  the  courts  are 
such  diverse  and  fundamental  activities  as  the  taxing 
power,  the  exercise  of  the  police  power,  the  regulation 
of  elections,  the  control  of  public  utilities,  the  exercise 
of  the  power  of  eminent  domain,  the  creation  of  municipal 
courts,  the  annexation  of  territory,  the  control  of  public 
education,  the  ownership  and  operation  of  public  utilities, 
and  a  large  variety  of  other  functions. 

The  wording  of  the  constitutional  home-rule  provisions 
themselves  as  well  as  of  the  enabling  acts  passed  in  execu- 
tion thereof  and  the  diverging  opinions  of  the  courts  as  to 
the  proper  application  of  the  home-rule  idea  have  made 
it  almost  impossible  to  derive  any  general  conclusions  as 
to  the  significance  of  home-rule  powers  from  the  exam- 
ination of  the  whole  subject.  Even  within  a  single  state 
the  judicial  interpretation  of  the  constitutional  provisions 
has  more  frequently  than  not  been  either  obscure  or  full 
of  contradictions.  But  this  much  is  apparent  that  neither 
constitution  framers  nor  legislative  or  judicial  interpreters 
have  been  willing  to  recognize  the  propriety  of  setting  up 
cities  in  the  position  of  an  impcrium  in  imperio  as  re- 
gards their  independence  from  legislative  control  in  mat- 
ters that  are  regarded  as  involving  the  interests  of  the 
state  as  well  as  those  of  the  cities. 


364  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Perhaps  the  best  expression  of  authoritative  opinion  on 
this  difficult  question  of  how  far  cities  may  properly  be 
assured  a  scope  of  action  free  from  legislative  control 
may  be  found  in  the  model  constitutional  provisions  for 
municipal  home-rule  contained  in  the  New  Municipal 
Program  of  the  National  Municipal  League.7  Under  the 
head  of  powers  this  draft  provides  that  each  city  shall 
have  the  authority  to  exercise  all  powers  relating  to  mu- 
nicipal affairs,  a  constitutional  expression  of  the  principle 
on  which  powers  are  commonly  delegated  to  cities  in  con- 
tinental Europe  by  the  legislatures.  This  broad  grant, 
which  it  will  be  noticed  does  not  specify  what  is  meant 
by  municipal  affairs  and,  therefore,  leaves  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  phrase  to  the  courts  again,  is  then  modified 
by  the  reciprocal  provision  that  in  matters  relating  to  state 
affairs  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  enact  laws  applic- 
able alike  to  all  cities  in  the  state  shall  not  be  deemed  to 
be  restricted  or  limited  by  the  general  grant  of  authority 
to  cities. 

Then  for  greater  certainty  the  draft  enumerates  cer- 
tain powers  which  shall  be  deemed  to  be  part  of  the  powers 
conferred  upon  cities,  including  the  levying,  assessing,  and 
collecting  of  taxes  and  the  borrowing  of  money  within 
limits  prescribed  by  general  laws;  the  levying  and  collect- 
ing of  special  assessments  for  benefits  conferred;  the  fur- 
nishing of  all  local  public  services;  the  purchase,  hire, 
construction,  ownership,  maintenance,  operation,  or  lease 
of  local  public  utilities,  and  the  acquisition  of  property 
within  or  without  the  corporate  limits  for  such  purposes ; 
the  grant  of  local  public  utility  franchises  and  the  regula- 
tion of  their  exercise;  the  making  of  local  improvements 
and  the  acquisition  of  property  necessary  for  such  im- 

7  A  New  Municipal  Program,  Woodruff,  editor  (New  York,  1919). 
pp.  302-307. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       365 

provements,  combined  with  the  power  of  excess  condem- 
nation and  the  right  to  dispose  of  the  excess  under  restric- 
tions to  protect  and  preserve  the  improvements;  the 
issuance  and  sale  of  bonds  on  the  security  of  property  or 
public  utilities  owned  by  the  city;  the  organization  and 
administration  of  public  schools  and  libraries,  subject  to 
the  general  laws  establishing  a  standard  of  education  for 
the  state,  and  the  adoption  of  enforcement  within  their 
limits  of  local  police,  sanitary,  and  other  similar  regula- 
tions not  in  conflict  with  general  laws.  This  enumeration 
is  expressly  declared  not  to  be  deemed  to  limit  or  restrict 
the  general  grant  of  all  powers  relating  to  municipal 
affairs. 

It  is  obvious  that  these  constitutional  provisions  do  not 
preclude  the  possibility  of  uncertainty  as  to  the  right  of 
cities  to  exercise  any  particular  power  not  included  under 
the  rather  broad  enumeration,  but  at  least  it  is  of  value 
as  showing  what  sort  of  powers  are  regarded  as  being  so 
clearly  of  primarily  local  concern  that  cities  should  by 
the  constitution  be  guaranteed  the  right  to  exercise  them, 
subject  in  specified  instances  to  the  control  of  the  legisla- 
ture exercised  by  general  law.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the 
powers  specifically  enumerated  represent  for  the  most  part 
powers  that  are  actually  exercised  by  cities  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  by  legislative  authorization  in  many  states 
in  which  there  are  no  constitutional  provisions  in  favor  of 
the  city's  powers,  except  perhaps  such  general  provisions 
as  the  prohibition  against  special  legislation.  The  extent 
to  which  these  powers  actually  have  been  exercised  by 
cities  will  be  considered  in  some  detail  later  on. 

The  Liability  of  Cities. —  Powers  are  not,  however, 
the  only  attributes  of  cities.  There  are  also  responsibili- 
ties. Indeed  the  very  grant  of  a  power  may  itself  involve 
a  responsibility  or  a  duty,  since  the  exercise  of  the  power 


366  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

may  be  made  mandatory  or  compulsory.  These  manda- 
tory obligations  upon  cities  have  constituted  at  various 
times  and  in  particular  cities  one  of  the  most  serious  of 
the  abuses  of  legislative  supremacy  over  cities,  unless  and 
until  forbidden  by  constitutional  restrictions.  But  even 
when  the  power  to  impose  governmental  obligations  and 
financial  burdens  upon  individual  cities  was  more  or  less 
completely  eliminated,  the  continuing  power  of  the  legis- 
lature to  charge  all  cities,  or  all  cities  within  permitted 
classes,  with  mandatory  powers  has  constituted  an  ever 
increasing  burden  upon  them,  especially  as  the  imposition 
of  such  obligations  has  not  always  been  accompanied  by 
the  grant  of  enlarged  financial  powers  to  meet  them.  As 
a  consequence,  of  course,  the  actual  freedom  of  the  cities 
to  undertake  permissive  functions  has  been  correspond- 
ingly restricted. 

Apart,  however,  from  these  responsibilities  expressly 
imposed  by  law,  cities  are  also  subject  to  liabilities  flowing 
from  their  character  as  corporations.8  In  the  first  place, 
it  may  be  pointed  out  that  cities  as  public  corporations 
can  be  sued  in  contract  on  practically  the  same  conditions 
as  private  corporations.  Therein  lies  a  fundamental  dis- 
tinction, recognized  in  England  and  the  United  States 
but  not  generally  in  the  continental  European  countries, 
between  the  city  as  a  subordinate  corporate  governmental 
agency,  and  the  state  as  sovereign.  The  latter  is  not  re- 
garded as  subject  to  suit  in  contract  except  by  its  own 
consent,  while  the  former  is  liable  on  a  contractual  basis 
without  express  legal  authorization.9 

8  For  a  discussion  of  the  legal  liabilities  of  cities  see  Dillon,  Law 
of  Municipal  Corporations,  fifth  edition  (Boston,  1911),  Chap, 
xxxii. 

9  The  liability  of  the  public  corporation  to  suit  is  frequently 
spoken  of  as  a  right  in  the  familiar  phrase  which  enumerates 
among  the  attributes  of  such  corporations  the  right  to  sue  and  be 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      367 

Furthermore,  the  city  as  a  municipal  corporation  is 
liable  in  tort  for  the  negligent  acts  of  its  agents  in  cer- 
tain cases,  a  liability  which  is  not  recognized  as  attaching 
to  the  state  by  common  law,  and  which,  unlike  contrac- 
tual liability,  our  state  and  national  governments  have 
not  been  disposed  to  assume.  The  decisions  with  regard 
to  the  extent  of  the  liability  of  municipal  corporations  in 
tort  are  so  conflicting  that  it  is  difficult  to  state  any  general 
principle  which  will  not  be  subject  to  modification  and  ex- 
ceptions, but  in  general  it  is  based  on  a  distinction  be- 
tween so-called  governmental  functions  and  so-called  pro- 
prietary functions.  The  former  comprise  the  acts  which 
the  city  performs  qua  sovereign,  the  latter  are  the  acts 
which  do  not  necessarily  involve  governmental  power  but 
are  capable  of  performance  by  a  private  corporation  or 
individual  as  well  as  by  governmental  agencies.  In  the 
performance  of  its  governmental  functions  the  city  is  not 
liable  for  the  torts,  that  is  the  wrongful  acts,  omissions, 
or  carelessness  of  its  agents,  while  in  the  performance  of 
its  proprietary  functions  it  is  so  liable.  The  line  between 
the  two  classes  of  acts  is  not  easy  to  draw  on  the  basis  of 
the  cases,  but  among  governmental  acts  are  included  the 
exercise  of  the  ordinance  power  by  the  city,  the  adminis- 
tration of  police,  fire,  and  public-health  protection,  the 
conduct  of  the  schools,  etc.     Proprietary  functions  on  the 

sued.  It  can  only  be  regarded  as  a  right,  however,  when  viewed 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  individual  members  of  the  corporation, 
for  by  the  assumption  of  the  corporate  character  the  individual 
liability  of  the  citizens  is  supplanted  by  the  collective  liability  of 
the  corporation.  It  will  be  remembered  that  before  corporate  ca- 
pacity was  conferred  upon  the  New  England  town  the  common 
law  held  that  the  property  of  any  inhabitant  could  be  taken  in  exe- 
cution of  a  judgment  against  the  town,  the  English  law  being  the 
same  with  regard  to  the  administrative  subdivisions,  other  than 
borough.  See  Goodnow,  Comparative  Administrative  Law,  pp.  171, 
172. 


368  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

other  hand,  include  such  activities  as  the  operation  of 
public  utilities  and  the  care  of  the  city  streets.  The  ele- 
ment of  profit  is  not  the  criterion,  therefore,  by  which  a 
proprietary  function  is  judged.  The  tendency,  moreover, 
seems  to  be  in  the  direction  of  extending  the  liability  of 
the  city  to  care  for  its  property  to  something  like  that  of 
the  owners  of  private  property,  without  reference  to  the 
use  to  which  it  is  put. 

Of  course,  liability  for  damages  caused  by  the  acts  of 
its  agents  even  in  the  performance  of  governmental  func- 
tions can  be  imposed  by  law  upon  the  city,  and  that  has 
sometimes  been  done.  On  the  other  hand  the  common- 
law  liability  of  municipal  corporations  in  the  performance 
of  proprietary  functions  by  its  agents  can  be  restricted 
in  the  same  way,  and  that  also  is  not  uncommon.  Par- 
ticularly serious  to  the  public  treasury  is  the  liability  of 
the  city  to  keep  its  streets  in  repair,  for  thousands  of  dam- 
age suits  are  brought  each  year  for  injuries  alleged  to 
have  resulted  from  defects  in  streets  and  side-walks.  The 
ease  with  which  fraudulent  suits  of  this  kind  can  be 
brought  and  successfully  maintained  has  led  in  some  cases 
to  relieving  cities  from  this  liability  by  law.  It  is  some- 
times urged,  moreover,  that  the  non-liability  of  cities  for 
the  acts  of  its  agents  in  the  performance  of  governmental 
functions  is  justifiable  on  the  ground  that  it  would  prove 
too  costly  to  penalize  cities  under  a  system  of  popular 
government  for  the  lapses  from  efficiency  of  its  agents 
engaged  in  activities  from  which  the  city  derives  no 
profit.10  It  would  seem  evident,  however,  that  justice 
would  demand  that  the  damages  resulting  from  such 
lapses  should  be  shared  by  members  of  the  corporation 
as  a  whole  and  not  saddled  upon  the  unfortunate  indi- 
vidual who  without  means  of  protecting  himself  is  injured 

10  See  Munro,  The  Government  of  American  Cities,  p.  94. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       369 

in  body  or  property  by  the  wrongful  or  careless  perform- 
ance of  the  city's  agents. 

The  city  ordinarily  exercises  its  local  powers  in  the 
first  instance  through  the  enactment  of  ordinances  which 
are  then  put  into  execution  by  its  executive  and  admin- 
istrative officers.  Even  this  ordinance  power,  however, 
limited  as  it  has  been  seen  to  be  by  the  doctrine  of  strict 
construction,  is  subject  to  certain  well  recognized  restric- 
tions in  the  manner  of  its  exercise.11  In  the  first  place, 
of  course,  the  provisions  of  the  Federal  Constitution 
which  limit  the  powers  of  states  with  regard  to  impair- 
ment of  contract  obligations,  the  deprivation  of  property 
without  due  process  of  law,  the  denial  of  the  equal  pro- 
tection of  the  laws,  etc.,  apply  equally  to  the  cities,  for 
the  state  obviously  cannot  authorize  a  subordinate  agency 
to  do  what  the  state  itself  is  forbidden  to  do.  In  the 
same  way  the  provisions  of  the  state  constitutions  safe- 
guarding individual  rights  constitute  equally  effective 
limitations  on  the  exercise  of  the  ordinance  power  by 
cities.  In  addition,  however,  to  these  fundamental  limi- 
tations, cities  are  still  further  restricted  in  the  exercise  of 
the  ordinance  power,  for  municipal  ordinances  will  in 
some  cases  be  held  invalid  where  similar  legislative  acts 
would  be  upheld.  So  municipal  ordinances  involving  re- 
strictions upon  individual  liberty  or  property  must  be 
reasonable,  that  is  they  must  not  be  oppressive,  that  is  in- 
terfere more  than  is  necessary  to  accomplish  a  legitimate 
end,  nor  unduly  restrain  trade  as  by  granting  monopoly 
rights.  Finally  also,  ordinances  must  be  passed  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  formalities  prescribed  by  statute  or 
by  charter  else  they  will  not  be  upheld.  It  sufficiently 
appears  from  the  foregoing  how  much  American  cities  are 
hedged  about  in  the  exercise  of  their  powers. 

11  See  Dillon,  Municipal  Corporations,  Chaps,  xv  and  xvi. 


370  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Municipal  Functions  in  General 

The  Development  of  Municipal  Functions. —  It  will 
will  be  remembered  how  limited  were  the  functions  per- 
formed by  American  cities  up  to  the  close  of  the  eighteenth 
century.12  Cities  were  small,  it  is  true,  but  their  activi- 
ties were  very  much  less  extensive  than  those  undertaken 
as  a  rule  by  cities  of  even  smaller  population  to-day. 
Indeed,  striking  as  has  been  the  growth  in  the  number  and 
size  of  American  cities  during  the  last  century,  the  ex- 
pansion of  their  activities  has  been  more  remarkable  still. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  professional 
uniformed  police  forces  were  unknown,13  constables  and 
nightwatchmen  continuing  to  play  their  ancient  and  inef- 
fective role  even  in  the  largest  cities  until  towards  the  mid- 
dle of  the  century.  Professional  fire  departments  were 
also  unknown  until  about  the  same  period,  the  old  bucket 
brigades  and  volunteer  companies  continuing  to  do  duty  in 
cities  of  a  size  that  would  to-day  never  dream  of  relying 
on  that  expensive,  because  inefficient,  system  of  protec- 
tion. Health  boards  and  health  officers  appeared  fairly 
early  in  the  century  in  the  seaport  towns,  but  their  func- 
tion was  largely  restricted  to  measures  to  combat  the  in- 
troduction of  the  plague,  cholera,  and  other  contagious 
diseases  from  foreign  lands.  Scientific  public-health 
administration  as  a  municipal  function  is  a  development 
rather  of  the  twentieth  than  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
Education  was  probably  the  most  advanced  of  municipal 
functions,  though  of  course  measured  by  modern  stan- 
dards it  was  pitifully  rudimentary,  both  as  regards  the 
number  of  persons  reached,  and  the  character  and  extent 
of  the  instruction  offered.     Poor  relief  as  a  municipal 

12  See  above,  Chap.  ii. 

13  These  were  not  introduced  in  England  either  until  1829. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      371 

function  was  almost  unknown,  the  county  being,  as  has 
been  seen,  the  normal  poor-relief  area,  save  in  New  Eng- 
land. In  the  field  of  public  works  there  was  a  similar 
deficiency.  Street  paving  was  limited  in  extent  and  poor 
in  quality,  the  old  wooden  planking  and  the  rough  cob- 
ble stones  representing  the  last  word  in  this  field.  Not 
until  after  the  middle  of  the  century  did  marked  improve- 
ments in  the  character  of  pavements  make  their  appear- 
ance and  not  until  much  later  did  cities  generally  recognize 
an  obligation  to  do  more  than  pave  the  main  streets. 
Street  lighting  was  a  ludicrous  affair  of  lanterns,  illumi- 
nating gas  having  just  been  invented  and  being  unknown 
in  American  cities.  But  even  after  the  development  of 
that  agency  it  was  many  years  before  American  cities  un- 
dertook to  provide  adequate  street-lighting  systems,  the 
manufacture  and  distribution  of  gas  and  later  of  electric 
light,  depending  almost  entirely  on  private  enterprise  in 
this  country.  Sewer  systems  were  practically  unknown 
to  American  cities  and  did  not  develop  as  general  munici- 
pal undertakings  until  towards  the  end  of  the  century. 
Sewage  disposal  plants  were  not  dreamed  of  for  three- 
quarters  of  a  century.  Even  the  fundamental  service  of 
a  public  water  supply  was  virtually  limited  to  the  sinking 
and  care  of  public  wells  and  pumps.  To-day  the  smallest 
cities  strive  to  furnish  a  plentiful  supply  of  pure  water 
to  every  household.  Other  public  utilities  were  prac- 
tically unknown  and  when  introduced  were,  except  in  the 
field  of  water  supply,  rarely  undertaken  by  the  city  di- 
rectly. 

The  phenomenal  increase  in  municipal  activities  can 
perhaps  best  be  illustrated  by  a  comparison  of  the  per 
capita  expenditures  of  New  York  City  in  18 10,  having  a 
population  of  about  a  hundred  thousand  persons,  with  the 
expenditures  of  cities  of  that  size  to-day.     On  this  basis 


372  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

New  York  City  a  hundred  years  ago  was  spending  an- 
nually about  a  dollar  per  capita  for  all  municipal  pur- 
poses, while  in  191 6  Springfield,  Massachusetts,  with  an 
estimated  population  of  103,000  showed  a  per  capita  of 
total  expenditures  of  more  than  $75.00.  Even  when  the 
decreased  purchasing  power  of  the  dollar  in  19 16  as  com- 
pared with  its  value  a  hundred  years  ago  is  taken  into 
consideration,  the  discrepancy  is  still  sufficiently  remark- 
able as  an  evidence  of  the  expansion  of  municipal  activi- 
ties during  that  period. 

Another  feature  of  the  development  of  municipal  func- 
tions that  merits  consideration  is  the  shifting  emphasis 
placed  upon  the  kind  of  activities  that  cities  engage  in. 
At  the  outset,  it  will  be  remembered,  cities  were  conceived 
of  as  governmental  corporations  for  the  satisfaction  pri- 
marily if  not  wholly  of  distinctly  local  needs.  In  fact 
therein  lay  the  principal  distinction  between  the  urban 
units  of  government  and  the  counties,  the  latter  being 
regarded  in  law  and  in  practice  as  administrative  units 
for  the  convenient  administration  of  matters  of  state  or 
central  government.  But  the  increasingly  mandatory 
character  of  powers  granted  to  cities  and  the  direct  obliga- 
tions imposed  upon  them  in  connection  with  the  per- 
formance of  services  for  the  general  government  resulted 
in  the  cities  being  more  and  more  charged  with  matters  of 
state  concern.  At  the  same  time  the  practice  of  state  leg- 
islatures already  referred  to  of  establishing  centrally  ap- 
pointed commissions  for  the  performance  of  functions 
formerly  entrusted  to  local  officials  or  of  new  activities  in 
and  for  the  locality  resulted  in  the  diminution  of  the  con- 
trol of  the  city  over  what  might  naturally  be  regarded  as 
activities  for  the  satisfaction  of  local  needs.  Coupled 
with  all  this  has  come  the  recent  development  of  state 
administrative  control  over  certain  classes  of  local  activi- 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       373 

ties  which  has  still  further  limited  the  field  of  independent 
municipal  action. 

It  is  consequently  a  matter  of  great  difficulty,  if  not 
indeed  an  impossibility,  to  make  a  clear  classification  of 
the  activities  engaged  in  by  cities  on  the  basis  of  state  and 
municipal  functions.  Some  municipal  activities  such  as 
the  police  administration  which  is  concerned  with  the  en- 
forcement of  state  laws  are  clearly  of  the  greatest  con- 
cern to  the  state  as  a  whole.  Others,  such  as  the  pro- 
vision of  certain  municipal  public  utilities,  seem  to  be 
almost  wholly  a  matter  of  local  concern.  Increasing 
congestion  of  population,  however,  and  the  development 
of  transporation  of  persons  and  commodities  has  tended 
continually  to  emphasize  the  interests  of  the  state  as  a 
whole  in  almost  every  activity  of  the  city.  So  for  in- 
stance, the  preservation  of  decent  health  standards  within 
a  given  city  is  no  longer  a  matter  in  which  the  city  alone 
is  concerned,  for  a  single  city  may  become  the  focus  of 
infection  for  the  entire  state.  So  also  the  disposal  of  the 
sewage  of  a  city  may  involve  the  welfare  of  all  cities 
located  further  down  on  the  same  watershed.  Again, 
where  cities  are  crowded  together  it  may  not  be  possible 
to  leave  each  city  free  to  acquire  its  own  source  of  water 
supply  without  endangering  the  interests  of  other  cities 
forced  by  their  location  to  rely  on  the  same  supply. 
Even  the  conditions  of  the  principal  streets  in  a  city  may, 
in  these  days  of  increasing  motor  traffic  and  transporta- 
tion, involve  inconvenience  and  loss  to  other  communities 
located  on  highways  that  pass  through  the  city.  These 
examples  will  suffice  to  illustrate  the  point  that  very  few 
if  any  of  the  modern  city's  undertakings  can  to-day  be 
regarded  as  having  merely  a  local  significance. 

The  importance  of  the  city  as  a  governmental  agency  in 
the  United  States  may  best  be  realized  from  a  compari- 


374  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

son  of  the  per  capita  expenditures  of  cities  with  those  of 
the  counties,  the  states,  and  the  nation.  In  19 13,  a  year 
for  which  comparative  figures  are  available  and  which 
may  be  taken  as  reflecting  normal  conditions  for  the 
period  just  prior  to  the  World  War,  the  per  capita  gov- 
ernmental cost 14  in  146  of  the  cities  of  the  United  States 
with  a  population  of  more  than  30,000  amounted  to 
$32.46.  For  the  same  year  the  per  capita  governmental 
cost  payments  for  all  counties  amounted  to  $4.49,  and 
the  per  capita  governmental  cost  payments  for  the  Federal 
government  amounted  to  $10.15.  For  the  same  year  the 
total  per  capita  expenditures  15  of  the  states  amounted  to 
approximately  $5.00.  In  other  words  the  per  capita 
governmental  cost  payments  in  cities  16  amounted  in  that 
year  to  more  than  half  as  much  again  as  the  total  per  capita 
governmental  cost  payments  in  counties,  states,  and  na- 
tion combined.  When  in  connection  with  this  signifi- 
cant comparison  the  further  fact  is  kept  in  mind  that 
municipal  indebtedness  and  consequently  payments  on 
debt  obligations  also  show  a  much  larger  per  capita  figure 
than  is  found  in  the  case  of  the  other  governmental  units, 
the  relative  significance  of  the  cities  as  governmental  agen- 

14  Including  expenses,  interest,  and  outlays. 

15  The  American  Year  Book  for  1913  gives  the  available  figures 
for  total  expenditures  of  states,  which  are,  of  course,  greater  than 
the  governmental  cost  payments,  as  they  include  such  items  as 
payments  for  the  redemption  of  debt  obligations.  But  as  these  are 
relatively  of  much  less  importance  than  in  the  cities,  the  difference 
between  total  expenditures  and  governmental  cost  payments  will 
not  be  as  great  as  it  would  be  in  the  case  of  the  local  governments. 

16  This  assumes  that  the  per  capita  cost  payments  in  the  146 
cities  considered  are  fairly  typical  of  such  figures  for  cities  as  a 
whole.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  Census  figures  show 
that  the  per  capita  governmental  cost  payments  in  general  increase 
with  the  size  of  the  city,  that  is  expenditures  increase  more  rapidly 
than  population.  Hence  these  figures  must  be  taken  to  represent 
the  situation  in  cities  of  more  than  30,000  inhabitants  only. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      375 

cies  is  still  further  emphasized.  Moreover  in  the  ten 
years  from  1903  to  19 13  the  per  capita  governmental 
cost  payments  in  these  cities  increased  from  $24.64  to 
$32.46,  or  nearly  33  per  cent. 

The  variety  of  undertakings  for  which  cities  expend 
such  enormous  sums  17  is  clearly  shown  by  the  divisions 
adopted  by  the  Census  Bureau  for  listing  the  payments. 
In  addition  to  the  expenses  of  public-service  enterprises, 
expenses  of  general  departments  are  listed  under  ten  main 
heads  as  follows :  General  Government ;  Protection  to  Per- 
sons and  Property;  Conservation  of  Health;  Sanitation  or 
Promotion  of  Cleanliness;  Highways;  Charities,  Hospi- 
tals, and  Corrections;  Education;  Recreation;  Miscella- 
neous; and  General.  Each  of  these  is  in  turn  subdivided 
and  statistics  are  given  for  no  less  than  eighty-seven  dis- 
tinct objects  of  expenditures.  But  for  purposes  of  brief 
consideration  the  main  activities  of  cities  may  conveniently 
be  grouped  under  the  following  main  heads:  Public 
Safety;  Public  Health;  Public  Education;  Social  Wel- 
fare ;  Public  Works ;  Public  Utilities ;  and  City  Planning ; 
while  at  the  basis  of  them  all  stands  the  matter  of  Munici- 
pal Finances. 

Public  Safety. —  Under  the  head  of  the  activities  of 
the  city  directed  towards  the  preservation  of  public  safety 
the  two  main  divisions  are  the  police  and  fire  departments, 
which  in  many  of  the  larger  cities  constitute  separate  de- 
partments of  the  city  government,  though  in  many  of  the 
commission  governed  cities  these  are  united  in  a  single 
department  of  public  safety. 

The  Police  Department. —  Since  the  functions  of  the 
police  department  18  in  preserving  order  and  protecting 

1TThe  total  payments  of  the  213  cities  with  populations  of  more 
than  30,000  in  191 6  amounted  to  more  than  $2,000,000,000. 

18  See  Fuld,  Police  Administration    (New  York,  1910)  :  McAdoo, 


376  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

persons  and  property  are  fundamental  and  are  among  the 
powers  entrusted  almost  universally  to  cities,  this  con- 
stitutes an  important  part  of  the  activity  of  every  city, 
except  in  those  relatively  rare  instances  where  the  state 
conducts  this  work  through  its  own  officers,  and  even 
there  the  burden  is  borne  by  the  taxpayers  of  the  munici- 
pality. The  percentage  of  the  total  governmental  cost 
payments  devoted  to  the  police  department  increase  in 
general  with  the  size  of  the  city.  For  the  cities  of  more 
than  30,000  population  in  191 7  the  average  percentage  for 
this  purpose  was  approximately  1 1  per  cent 19  of  the  ex- 
penses of  general  departments.  But  the  population  of  the 
city  is  not  the  only  important  factor  in  determining  the 
proper  size  of  the  police  force,  as  the  area  of  the  city  and 
the  character  of  the  population  are  also  of  appreciable  im- 
portance, while  the  policy  of  a  particular  city  as  to  the 
salaries  paid  will  influence,  of  course,  the  amount  ex- 
pended, as  much  as  the  mere  question  of  the  number  of 
men  employed  on  the  force. 

The  most  characteristic  function  of  the  police  force  of 
a  city  is  the  patrolling  of  the  streets,  which  is  both  a  pre- 
ventative and  a  remedial  function.  One  measure  of  the 
efficiency  of  a  police  department  is  to  be  found  in  the 
number  of  crimes  of  violence  that  are  committed  upon  the 
persons  and  property  of  citizens,  since  such  crimes  can  be 
safely  committed  only  if  the  patrolling  force  is  so  inad- 
equate as  to  make  the  arrest  of  the  offenders  unlikely. 

Guarding  a  Great  City  (New  York,  1906),  Fosdick,  American  Police 
Systems  (New  York,  1920)  ;  and  on  European  Police,  Fosdick, 
European  Police  Systems  (New  York,  1906). 

19  The  statistics  herein  considered  are  in  general  taken  from  the 
Census  volume  on  Financial  Statistics  of  Cities  for  1917,  that  year's 
figures  being  chosen  rather  than  the  latest  figures  because  they  rep- 
resent the  conditions  just  prior  to  the  abnormal  situation  caused 
by  the  entry  of  the  United  States  into  the  World  War. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       377 

But  the  patrolling  of  the  city  as  a  safeguard  against  crime 
is  not  the  only  function  of  the  police  force.  The  ap- 
prehension of  offenders  who  are  not  caught  red-handed 
is  another  important  activity  of  the  police  force,  usually 
entrusted  to  a  special  branch  of  the  force  known  as  the 
detective  force.  Then  there  is  the  enforcement  of  traf- 
fic regulations  which,  with  the  increasing  use  of  motor 
vehicles,  is  becoming  a  steadily  more  important  police 
activity,  and  commonly  entrusted  also  to  a  special  branch 
of  the  police  force  known  as  the  traffic  squad.  The  en- 
forcement of  laws  against  gambling,  intoxicating  liquors, 
and  prostitution  constitutes  another  important  police  ac- 
tivity and  one  which  has  been  the  source  of  most  of  the 
police  corruption  under  which  American  cities  have  so 
frequently  suffered.  This  function  is  not  usually  en- 
trusted to  the  regular  police  forces  in  European  cities, 
and  there  is  a  tendency  in  the  United  States  to  take  the 
last  mentioned  subject  out  of  the  hands  of  the  regular 
patrolling  force  and  employ  a  specially  trained  force 
known  in  some  cities  as  morals  officers  under  permanent 
morals  commissions.  In  this  connection  also  the  in- 
creased employment  of  police  women  to  protect  girls  and 
to  enforce  the  laws  against  prostitution  is  worthy  of  men- 
tion. Finally  the  police  force  is  of  great  importance 
in  quieting  disturbances  in  connection  with  mobs  and 
riots. 

The  organization  of  the  municipal  police  force  is  prac- 
tically everywhere  on  a  military  basis  with  a  chief  of 
police  at  the  head,  and  captains,  lieutenants,  sergeants  and 
corporals  as  subordinate  officers  above  the  patrolmen.  In 
larger  places  the  city  is  divided  into  precincts  or  districts 
with  a  police  station  in  each  and  a  subordinate  officer  in 
control.  The  military  features  of  the  police  force  have 
been  adopted  from  Europe  where  the  police  were  regu- 


378  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

larly  organized  on  the  military  basis.  But  the  adoption 
of  the  military  organization  and  particularly  the  employ- 
ment of  distinctive  uniforms  was  at  first  strenuously  op- 
posed in  England  and  the  United  States  as  smacking  too 
much  of  militarism. 

For  a  time  it  was  not  uncommon  to  find  police  boards 
in  American  cities  in  charge  of  this  branch  of  city  admin- 
istration. But  the  necessity  of  centralization  of  control 
in  the  hands  of  a  single  person  for  a  function  like  that  of 
the  police  department  has  come  to  be  so  clearly  recognized 
that  the  almost  universal  practice  is  to  have  a  single  of- 
ficial directly  in  charge.  There  is  less  agreement  both 
in  practice  and  in  theory,  however,  as  to  relative  value 
of  commissioners  or  heads  of  police  departments  who 
have  been  taken  from  the  service  itself  and  those  who  are 
taken  from  the  outside.  From  the  point  of  view  of  tech- 
nical knowledge  of  the  chief,  and  also  from  the  point  of 
view  of  the  esprit  de  corps  of  the  force,  there  is  a  good 
deal  to  be  said  for  the  professional  head.  On  the  other 
hand  the  continual  need  for  the  exercise  of  tact  and 
judgment  in  the  performance  of  the  duties  of  the  police 
department  make  it  extremely  desirable  that  ultimate  au- 
thority be  lodged  in  a  man  who  is  sympathetic  with  the 
point  of  view  of  the  public,  rather  than  limited  by  the 
naturally  narrow  horizon  of  the  force  itself. 

In  an  increasing  number  of  cities  the  principles  of  the 
merit  system  of  appointment,  promotion,  discipline,  and 
removal  are  being  applied  to  the  police  departments, 
though  the  absolute  necessity  of  complete  disciplinary 
control  in  this  branch  of  the  municipal  service  tends  some- 
what to  limit  the  extent  to  which  the  discretion  of  the  re- 
sponsible head  can  advantageously  be  diminished  in  the 
matter  of  discipline  and  removal.  In  this  field  of  the 
municipal  service,  as  also  in  the  fire  departments,  pen- 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      379 

sions  are  more  commonly  provided  than  in  other  fields.20 
The  question  of  the  organization  of  policemen  into  un- 
ions affiliated  with  outside  labor  bodies  and  the  right  of 
the  policemen  to  strike  has  recently  become  an  issue  in  a 
dramatic  way  in  Boston,  where  the  police  are  subject  to 
state  control.  According  to  a  recent  compilation  there 
were  in  1919  thirty-seven  cities  whose  police  were  union- 
ized in  affiliation  with  the  American  Federation  of  La- 
bor.21 Finally  there  may  be  emphasized  again  the  vital 
connection  between  police  efficiency  and  the  police  or 
magistrates  courts  in  cities,  which  has  already  been  pointed 
out.22 

It  is  a  curious  fact  in  connection  with  police  administra- 
tion that  although  there  is  perhaps  no  branch  of  municipal 
activity  in  which  the  state  as  a  whole  has  a  more  im- 
mediate interest,  the  state  has  rarely  attempted  to  safe- 
guard this  interest  in  an  effective  way.  The  police  force 
of  the  city  is  not  concerned  wholly  or  even  chiefly  with 
the  enforcement  of  local  police  ordinances.  It  is  the 
agency  upon  which  the  state  depends  almost  altogether  for 
the  enforcement  of  the  general  criminal  laws  within  the 
city.  If  the  local  police  force  fails  to  function  in  this 
direction,  the  state  laws  are  simply  ignored,  for  while 
the  sheriff  of  the  county  in  which  the  city  is  located  may 
have  the  power  and  the  obligation  to  prevent  violations  of 
state  law  and  to  arrest  the  offenders,  it  is  a  matter  of  vir- 
tual impossibility  for  him  to  do  so  effectively  in  any  city 

20  All  but  two  of  the  twenty-one  cities  with  more  than  300,000 
in  1917  showed  expenditures  for  police  pensions  as  did  also  all 
but  eight  of  the  forty-five  cities  with  a  population  between  100,000 
and  300,000.  In  the  smaller  population  groups  such  items  were 
less  general,  but  two-thirds  of  the  sixty-one  cities  of  the  popula- 
tion groups  from  50,000  to  100,000  and  considerably  half  of  those 
between  30,000  and  50,000  reported  expenditures  under  this  head. 

21  The  American  Year  Book,  1919,  p.  253. 

22  See  above,  pp.  353,  354- 


380  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  considerable  size.  So  far  as  the  generally  objection- 
able crimes  are  concerned  the  local  interest  of  the  citizens 
may  normally  be  counted  upon  to  insist  on  adequate  pro- 
tection to  persons  and  property.  But  in  this  country  a 
great  many  state  laws  make  actions  punishable  which  in 
the  minds  of  city  dwellers  are  not  generally  regarded  as 
reprehensible.  This  is  particularly  true  of  laws  setting 
up  standards  of  morality  and  making  punishable  such 
activities  as  gambling,  Sunday  amusements,  the  liquor 
traffic,  the  showing  of  questionable  exhibitions,  and  pros- 
titution. Where,  as  has  been  the  case  in  many  instances, 
local  sentiment  approves  of  or  at  least  condones  activi- 
ties prohibited  by  state  law,  the  local  police  force,  by 
simply  not  enforcing  the  laws  in  question  can  and  does 
render  the  state  law  nugatory.  Such  a  situation,  of 
course,  strikes  directly  at  the  sovereignty  of  the  state, 
and  while  the  most  obvious  solution  would  seem  to  be  for 
the  state  to  refrain  from  attempting  to  impose  its  own 
more  or  less  rural  code  of  morals  on  cities,  as  long  as 
it  insists  on  doing  so  there  is  a  very  real  danger  involved 
in  the  disregard  for  all  law  which  such  a  condition  en- 
genders and  which  is  frequently  considered  as  something 
distinctively  American.  And  yet  the  other  possible  rem- 
edy of  giving  to  the  state  a  sufficient  control  over  the 
police  forces  of  cities  to  insure  their  enforcement  of  all 
state  laws  has  been  tried  in  only  a  relatively  few  instances 
and  has  not  been  signally  successful.  It  is  found  in  only 
three  or  four  of  the  largest  American  cities  to-day.23 
Perhaps  the  English  system  of  affording  considerable  fi- 
nancial aid  to  cities  that  meet  a  reasonable  standard  of 
police  efficiency  might  prove  to  be  a  more  satisfactory  way 
out  of  the  dilemma,  since  direct  state  administration 
which  is  the  rule  in  continental  European  countries  seems 


23  Boston,  St.  Louis,  and  Baltimore. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       381 

to  be  so  distasteful  to  American  cities  as  to  render  its 
adoption  in  this  country  inexpedient. 

The  Fire  Department. — Fire  departments  are  found  in 
all  cities  of  more  than  30,000  population  and  in  a  large 
number  of  cities  below  that  size,  though  in  the  smaller 
cities  volunteer  departments  are  relied  upon  to  a  consid- 
erable extent  to  supplement  the  work  of  a  small  regular 
force,  or  even  in  the  smallest  cities  almost  completely. 

The  organization  of  the  fire  department  in  the  larger 
cities  is  along  similar  lines  to  that  found  in  police  depart- 
ments, namely  on  the  military  model  with  a  chief  at  the 
head  and  captains  in  charge  of  the  individual  stations,  and 
a  distinguishing  uniform  for  its  members.24  Somewhat 
the  same  problems  of  organization  arise  in  connection  with 
the  fire  department  that  are  encountered  in  the  case  of  the 
police  department.  The  question  of  the  board  versus 
the  single-commissioner  form  of  department  head,  the 
qualifications  requisite  for  the  responsible  head,  the 
method  of  selecting,  controlling,  and  discharging  the  per- 
sonnel, and  the  one-  or  two-platoon  plan  of  organization 
are  all  matters  of  great  importance  in  the  fire  department, 
though  the  absence  of  close  contact  with  the  corrupting 
forces  of  vice  and  crime  have  not  subjected  our  fire  de- 
partments to  the  same  demoralizing  influences  that  have 
been  at  work  on  the  police  departments.  Similarly  the 
immediate  interest  of  the  state  at  large  in  the  efficiency  of 
fire  departments  is  not  as  great  as  it  has  been  seen  to  be 
in  connection  with  the  police  department. 

In  point  of  efficiency  of  the  fire-fighting  force,  and  par- 
ticularly in  the  matter  of  technical  equipment,  American 
cities  as  a  rule  appear  to  be  in  advance  of  European  cities. 

24  An  interesting  description  of  the  organization  of  the  fire  de- 
partment in  a  large  city  may  be  found  in  Croker,  Fire  Prevention 
(New  York,  1012). 


382  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Certainly  as  regards  the  relative  importance  of  the  mu- 
nicipal expenditures  for  the  fire  departments  American 
cities  show  an  appreciation  of  the  necessity  of  adequate 
protection.25  As  compared  with  European  cities  Ameri- 
can cities  spend  approximately  eight  times  as  much  per 
capita  in  maintaining  fire  departments.  But  there  is  an- 
other side  to  the  picture.  With  all  this  enormous  expen- 
diture the  annual  fire  loss  in  American  cities  is  more  than 
eight  times  as  great  as  in  European  cities.  The  explana- 
tion of  this  astonishing  discrepancy  lies  simply  in  the  fact 
that  in  Europe  chief  emphasis  is  placed  upon  fire  preven- 
tion whereas  American  cities  have  been  chiefly  concerned 
with  providing  men  and  equipment  for  fighting  fires  after 
they  occur.  In  recent  years,  however,  more  attention  is 
being  devoted  to  the  preventive  side  in  this  country  also.26 
By  the  enforcement  of  building  regulations  with  a  thor- 
ough and  continuous  inspection,  by  the  elimination  of  fire 
risk  due  to  the  accumulation  of  combustible  materials, 
and  above  all  by  a  campaign  of  education  directed  towards 
the  suppression  of  individual  carelessness,  which  occasions 
the  greatest  loss  of  life  and  property,  the  city  government 
can  do  a  great  deal  more  towards  reducing  the  fire  loss 
than  could  ever  be  done  by  the  maintenance  of  the  most 
efficient  fire-fighting  force  and  equipment  imaginable. 
In  this  work  of  fire  prevention  the  state  can  be  of  great 
help  through  the  aid  of  a  central  fire  prevention  bureau 

23  In  1917  the  governmental  cost  payments  for  fire  departments 
in  the  cities  of  more  than  30,000  population  averaged  nearly  nine 
per  cent  of  the  total  expenses  of  general  departments. 

26  The  literature  of  fire  prevention  in  this  country  is  now  very 
extensive,  though  practically  all  the  product  of  the  last  ten  years. 
In  addition  to  the  work  of  Croker  on  Fire  Prevention,  already  re- 
ferred to,  there  may  be  mentioned  especially  Freitag,  Fire  Preven- 
tion and  Fire  Protection  as  Applied  to  Building  Construction  (New 
York,  1912),  and  the  publications  of  the  National  Board  of  Fire 
Underwriters  and  of  the  National  Fire  Protection  Association. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      383 

to  cooperate  with  the  local  governments  without  inter- 
fering directly  in  the  organization  and  management  of  the 
fire  departments. 

Public  Health.27  —  In  some  respects  the  public-health 
problem  may  be  regarded  as  distinctively  a  city  problem, 
though  by  no  means  exclusively  so.  In  a  large  sense 
public-health  protection  is,  of  course,  merely  a  part  of 
the  general  function  of  protection  to  person  and  property, 
and  it  is  included  within  the  concept  of  the  police  power 
as  very  generally  conferred  upon  cities.  But  its  prob- 
lems are  sufficiently  technical  and  its  mode  of  function- 
ing sufficiently  distinctive  to  justify  its  being  entrusted 
to  a  special  branch  of  municipal  administration,  which  has 
been  done,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  almost  all  cities,  ex- 
cept the  very  smallest.  Its  peculiar  importance  as  a  mu- 
nicipal function  arises,  of  course,  from  the  fact  that  the 
congestion  of  city  life  not  only  causes  health  dangers  to 
arise  which  are  of  relatively  little  importance  in  the  more 
sparsely  populated  rural  areas,  but  the  city  dweller,  by 
reason  of  that  very  congestion,  is  virtually  helpless  to 
protect  himself  and  his  family  from  those  dangers. 

27  In  recent  years  a  very  considerable  amount  of  literature  deal- 
ing with  general  and  special  phases  of  public-health  administra- 
tion has  appeared.  Among  the  more  general  works  may  be  men- 
tioned Rosenau,  editor,  Preventive  Medicine  and  Hygiene  (New 
York,  1913)  ;  Godfrey,  The  Health  of  the  City  (Boston,  1910)  ; 
Hemenway,  American  Public  Health  Protection  (Indianapolis, 
1916).  Among  special  manuals  for  health  officers  may  be  noted 
MacNutt,  Manual  for  Health  Officers  (New  York,  1915)  ;  Over- 
ton, The  Health  Officer  (Philadelphia,  1919)  ;  and  Balch,  A  Man- 
ual for  Boards  of  Health  and  Health  Officers  (Albany,  1908). 
The  reports  of  the  American  Public  Health  Association  and  its 
quarterly  Journal  contain  valuable  articles  and  a  record  of  current 
developments  in  the  field  of  public-health  administration,  and  the 
Bulletins  of  the  United  States  Health  Service  while  not  dealing 
specifically  with  health  administration  in  cities  are  of  great  value 
to  the  health  officer  and  students  of  public-health  administration. 


384  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

Among  the  more  important  phases  of  public-health  pro- 
tection may  be  mentioned  the  protection  of  the  purity  of 
the  food  supply  of  the  city,  the  prevention  and  handling  of 
contagious  diseases  not  directly  connected  with  the  food 
supply,  the  proper  disposal  of  the  city's  wastes,  the  housing 
problem,  and  the  education  of  the  citizenship  in  personal 
hygiene  and  public-health  protection. 

The  Food  Supply. —  Chief  among  the  aspects  of  the 
food  supply  of  the  city  that  have  an  intimate  connection 
with  the  public  health  are  the  provision  of  pure  water  and 
pure  milk.  Water  as  a  universal  necessity  of  life  which 
the  city  dweller  is  not  in  a  position  to  secure  for  himself 
is  of  fundamental  importance  in  the  public-health  prob- 
lem because  of  its  extreme  susceptibility  to  pollution,  pol- 
lution of  a  kind  that  involves  the  most  serious  of  conse- 
quences. Typhoid  fever,  typhus,  dysentery,  and  a  long 
list  of  other  serious  water-borne  diseases  take  a  frightful 
toll  in  sickness  and  death  if  the  city  does  not  insure  the 
maximum  purity  of  the  water  supply.  For  that  reason 
the  securing  of  a  supply  of  pure  water  for  cities  has 
been  one  of  the  chief  concerns  of  city  governments  from 
earliest  times  and  has  been  directly  taken  over  by  the  ma- 
jority of  American  cities.28 

Scarcely  less  important  than  the  water  supply  as  a 
factor  in  public  health  is  the  milk  supply.  Especially 
fundamental  is  this  factor  in  the  control  of  infant  mortal- 
ity, a  scourge  under  which  cities  especially  have  suffered. 
Although  our  cities  have  not  been  inclined  to  undertake 
the  function  of  themselves  supplying  pure  milk,  they  have 
in  all  the  more  important  cities  taken  steps  to  insure  as 
far  as  possible  the  elimination  of  milk-borne  diseases, 
which  include  not  only  the  water-borne  diseases  but  a 

28  More  than  three-fourths   of   the  cities   with  more  than  30,000 
inhabitants  in  1917  reported  expenditures  for  water-supply  systems. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       385 

number  of  others  as  well,  such  as  scarlet  fever,  tubercu- 
losis, etc.  This  is  done  by  means  of  licenses  required  of 
milk  dealers  based  on  the  meeting  of  certain  standards  of 
purity  in  the  milk  they  sell.  In  the  more  careful  cities 
the  inspection  of  milk  extends  over  the  whole  business  of 
milk  distribution  from  its  source  to  its  delivery.  Fur- 
thermore in  the  summer  season,  when  the  danger  to  pub- 
lic health  from  impure  milk  is  the  greatest,  a  number  of 
the  larger  cities  have  aided  in  the  provision  of  pure  milk 
for  babies  through  municipal  milk  stations.29 

Similarly  cities  are  undertaking  to  an  increasing  extent 
to  insure  the  purity  of  other  articles  of  food  upon  which 
the  citizen  is  dependent  and  from  the  impurity  of  which 
his  health  may  suffer.  The  regulations  and  inspection  es- 
tablished for  this  purpose  not  only  safeguard  the  purity 
of  the  food  at  the  place  of  sale  in  the  markets  but  also 
its  serving  in  public  eating  places.30 

The  control  of  contagious  diseases  is  the  oldest  of  the 
activities  of  city  health  authorities  and  is  still  of  funda- 
mental importance.  Under  this  head  come  principally, 
quarantine,  isolation,  vaccination,  and  disinfection.  In 
this  regard  health  departments  have  very  broad  powers 
of  interfering  with  individual  liberty  and  property  for 
the  welfare  of  the  community  as  a  whole.  In  its  control 
over  the  public  schools  the  city  has  both  the  power  and 
an  obligation  to  protect  the  children  from  being  exposed 
to  contagious  diseases,  and  the  exclusion  of  pupils  suffer- 
ing from  or  being  carriers  of  contagious  diseases  is  an 
obvious  measure  of  public-health  protection.  Both  the 
closing  of  all  public  gathering  places,  including  churches, 
during  the  recent  influenza  epidemic,  and  the  ordering  of 

20  Three-fourths  of  the  cities  of  more  than  30,000  inhahitants  in 
1917  reported  expenditures  for  milk  and  dairy  control. 

30  Nearly  three-fourths  of  the  cities  with  more  than  30,000  inhab- 
itants in  1917  reported  expenditures  for  food  regulation. 


386  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

rat-proofing  for  houses  as  a  protection  against  the  spread 
of  bubonic  plague  illustrate  the  extensiveness  of  the 
powers  of  public-health  authorities.31 

It  must  be  pointed  out  that  the  main  emphasis  in  mod- 
ern public-health  administration  is  upon  prevention  rather 
than  cure.  But  many  of  the  most  effective  measures  of 
health  protection  against  contagious  diseases  are  of  very 
recent  origin,  owing  to  the  limited  knowledge  of  the  causes 
and  methods  of  prevention  of  some  of  the  most  serious 
of  these  diseases  until  within  the  last  few  years.  Ma- 
laria and  yellow  fever  are  illustrations  of  diseases  against 
the  spread  of  which  no  effective  measures  could  be  adopted 
until  the  recent  discoveries  of  the  nature  of  their  trans- 
mission. But  it  must  be  admitted  that  cities  are  lagging 
considerably  behind  the  progress  made  by  medical  and 
sanitary  science  both  in  the  adoption  of  the  measures 
proved  to  be  effective  and  in  the  extent  to  which  ordinances 
and  regulations  are  enforced.  The  greatest  recent  pro- 
gress perhaps  has  been  in  the  prevention  and  treatment  of 
tuberculosis.32  But  the  total  expenditures  for  public- 
health  administration,  comprising  prevention  and  treat- 
ment of  communicable  diseases,  conservation  of  child 
life,  and  food  regulation  and  inspection,  in  the  cities  of 
more  than  30,000  in  19 17  amounted  to  only  $0.48  per 
capita  or  2.5  per  cent  of  the  expenses  of  general  depart- 
ments. It  is  not  as  easy  to  demonstrate  the  financial 
benefits  to  be  derived  from  public-health  protection  as  it 
is  in  the  case  of  the  fire  department,  nevertheless  care- 
ful investigation  shows  that  the  money  loss  to  a  com- 

31  Hemenway,  Legal  Principles  of  Public-Health  Administration 
(Chicago,  1914),  contains  a  comprehensive  treatment  of  the  law 
governing  this  phase  of  the  police  power. 

32  Over  half  of  the  cities  of  more  than  30,000  population  in  1917 
reported  expenditures  specifically  for  the  prevention  and  treatment 
of  tuberculosis. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      387 

munity  from  preventable  disease  is  very  much  greater 
than  would  be  the  expense  of  a  system  of  public-health 
protection  that  would  largely  eliminate  this  waste  of  life, 
energy,  and  happiness. 

Waste  Disposal. —  Intimately  connected  with  the  health 
of  the  city,  though  like  the  water  supply  not  usually  under 
the  direct  administration  of  the  health  department,  is 
the  disposal  of  the  city's  wastes.  The  city's  wastes  com- 
prise first  of  all  the  human  waste  which  is  a  special  men- 
ace to  public  health.  Until  comparatively  recent  times 
in  municipal  history  the  sanitary  removal  of  such  waste 
through  sewers  was  not  regarded  as  a  municipal  function, 
and  in  this  country  this  function  was  at  first  left  largely 
to  private  undertakings.  The  increasing  realization  of 
the  importance  to  public  health  of  a  sanitary  method  of 
removing  this  source  of  danger  has  led  more  and  more 
cities  to  take  over  or  construct  public  sewage  systems,  un- 
til to-day  practically  all  American  cities  provide  public 
sewerage.33  In  a  number  of  cities  the  problem  of  ulti- 
mate disposal  of  the  sewage  has  come  to  be  as  important 
as  the  collection  and  removal,  owing  to  the  dangers  to 
other  communities  from  the  ordinary  method  of  emptying 
the  sewers  into  streams  or  bodies  of  water. 

Although  the  collection  and  disposal  of  sewage  is  the 
most  important  of  the  problems  of  waste  removal  in  cities 
from  the  point  of  view  of  public  health,  it  is  not  the  only 
one.  Other  organic  waste  that  must  be  taken  care  of  in- 
cludes garbage,  dead  animals,  and  manure.  The  proper 
removal  of  this  waste  is  particularly  important  because 
if  not  properly  looked  after  it  becomes  the  breeding  place 
of  flies,  now  recognized  as  one  of  the  great  disease  car- 

83  In  191 7  only  two  cities,  Atlantic  City,  New  Jersey,  and  Lancas- 
ter, Pennsylvania,  of  more  than  30,000  did  not  report  expenditures 
for  sewer  systems. 


388  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

riers.  Other  forms  of  waste  such  as  trash  and  ashes  pre- 
sent a  considerable  problem  in  the  matter  of  their  removal 
but  it  is  only  incidentally  a  public-health  problem. 

The  Housing  Problem. —  The  problem  of  congestion  in 
cities  has  a  very  fundamental  health  aspect.  Not  only 
do  miserable  tenements  and  slums  make  the  control  of 
communicable  diseases  almost  impossible,  but  the  lack  of 
adequate  light,  air,  and  opportunities  for  cleanliness  re- 
sult in  a  general  lowering  of  vitality  and  a  predisposition 
toward  disease.  The  housing  problem  is  indeed  of  vital 
importance  from  the  point  of  view  of  other  considerations 
than  public  health,  especially  in  regard  to  its  moral  as- 
pects, but  the  work  of  cities  in  controlling  housing  condi- 
tions has  been  chiefly  directed  toward  the  insurance  of  a 
minimum  amount  of  light  and  air  and  the  provision  of 
adequate  sanitary  facilities  in  tenement  buildings.  Amer- 
ican cities  have  not  attempted  themselves  to  provide 
houses  as  have  many  European  cities,  and  indeed  they 
do  not  ordinarily  have  power  to  do  so,  but  the  shortage 
of  houses  of  any  kind  in  the  last  few  years  has  brought 
the  matter  of  regulating  rents  and  even  encouraging  and 
aiding  the  building  of  dwelling  places  to  the  front  as  a 
vital  municipal  problem. 

Instruction  in  Public  Health. —  Finally,  but  by  no 
means  least,  among  the  activities  of  the  city  intended  to 
safeguard  the  public  health  is  the  education  of  the  public 
in  personal  and  public  hygiene.  This,  unlike  the  provi- 
sion of  a  water  supply,  the  removal  of  wastes,  and  the 
regulation  of  tenements,  is  a  part  of  the  work  of  the  health 
department,  and  is  in  some  respects  the  most  important 
part.  For  children,  instruction  in  these  matters  can  and 
should  be  provided  in  the  public  schools.  But  for  the 
great  mass  of  adults,  who  are  perhaps  even  more  in  need 
of  such  instruction,  the  health  department  must  be  the 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      389 

source  of  information.  In  fact  the  work  of  the  health 
department  cannot  in  a  democracy  go  very  far  beyond 
the  public  understanding  of  its  value  and  a  campaign  of 
education  on  health  matters  at  one  and  the  same  time  re- 
duces the  need  of  governmental  action  and  insures  ade- 
quate support  to  such  action  as  is  required.  For  that 
reason  modern  health  departments  spend  an  increasing 
amount  of  energy  in  preaching  the  doctrine  of  sanitation 
and  hygiene  through  leaflets,  lectures,  exhibits,  motion 
pictures,  visiting  nurses,  inspectors,  etc. 

In  the  organization  of  health  departments  we  find  a 
very  general  adoption  of  the  principle  of  board  adminis- 
tration, or  rather  a  very  general  retention  of  that  principle, 
which,  as  has  been  pointed  out,  was  for  a  while  the  prevail- 
ing and  accepted  form  of  organization  for  American  mu- 
nicipal departments.  There  is  more  to  be  said  for  the  ad- 
vantages derivable  from  the  board  form  in  the  work  of 
public-health  administration,  perhaps,  than  in  the  case  of 
the  police  and  fire  departments,  but  both  modern  opinion 
and  practice  are  swinging  over  to  the  commissioner  idea, 
with  a  single  responsible  head.  In  commission  governed 
cities  public  health  is  rarely  entrusted  to  a  separate  depart- 
ment but  is  included  under  some  other  department  such  as 
public  affairs,  or  public  safety.  Many  health  boards  must 
be  composed  of  or  at  least  include  on  their  membership 
practicing  physicians.  But  this  requirement  is  not  sound 
in  theory  and  has  not  worked  out  well  in  practice.  The 
ordinary  practicing  physician,  particularly  the  one  who 
can  find  time  for  work  on  a  health  board,  is  not  ordinar- 
ily a  sanitarian.  He  is  not  qualified  to  judge  as  an  ex- 
pert and  yet  is  inclined  to  interfere  in  details  of  adminis- 
tration which  the  expert  sanitarian  is  better  able  to  handle. 
Something  might  be  said  for  an  advisory  health  board, 
but  in  times  of  emergency  when  prompt  action  and  de- 


390  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

cisiveness  of  purpose  are  required  the  administrative 
health  board  may  be  as  dangerous  as  a  police  or  fire  board. 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  the  state  as  a  whole 
has  under  modern  conditions  a  direct  interest  in  insisting 
that  certain  standards  of  public-health  protection  be  met 
by  its  cities.  To  do  that  it  is  not  sufficient  to  enact  a  law 
imposing  that  obligation  on  the  city.  There  must  also 
be  some  way  of  making  that  obligation  effective.  City 
health  authorities  existed  in  this  country  more  than  fifty 
years  before  the  first  state  board  of  health  was  established, 
but  in  the  last  fifty  years  there  has  been  a  steady  increase 
in  the  number  of  state  health  authorities,  in  their  powers, 
and  particularly  in  their  control  over  the  local  bodies. 
The  adoption  of  state  health  codes  within  recent  years 
and  the  power  given  to  state  health  authorities  in  an  in- 
creasing number  of  states  to  insist  on  the  appointment  of 
health  officers  in  the  cities,  to  receive  reports  from  them, 
and  to  supervise  their  work  is  giving  the  states  an  in- 
creasing control.  One  fundamental  basis  for  adequate 
health  measures  is  the  collection  and  compilation  of  ac- 
curate vital  and  disease  statistics.  States  are  beginning 
to  require  such  statistics  of  the  cities  and  to  aid  the 
communities,  particularly  the  smaller  ones,  with  their 
superior  technical  resources.  In  the  matter  of  central 
control  over  local  public-health  administration  England 
has  since  the  middle  of  the  last  century  been  far  ahead  of 
our  states,  while  on  the  continent  of  Europe  public  health 
has  very  generally  been  regarded  as  a  matter  of  vital  cen- 
tral concern. 

Not  only  does  the  city  need  supervision  from  the  state 
in  the  interest  of  the  general  welfare,  but  it  should  be  pro- 
tected by  the  state  against  health  dangers  which  it  can- 
not adequately  meet.  The  pollution  of  its  water  supply, 
the  impurities  in  milk  and  food  brought  into  the  city,  the 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      391 

introduction  of  communicable  diseases  by  persons,  ani- 
mals, or  goods  shipped  into  the  city,  are  all  illustrations  of 
the  fact  that  the  city  needs  the  protection  of  the  state,  and 
even  of  the  Federal  Government,  within  its  sphere  if  its 
own  efforts  are  not  to  be  more  or  less  set  at  naught  by 
the  negligence  of  outside  persons  or  governmental  units. 
There  is,  therefore,  every  reason  why  the  city  and  the 
state  should  engage  in  the  closest  cooperation  in  the  field 
of  public-health  protection. 

Public  Education.34 —  Historically,  public  education  is 
one  of  the  earliest  functions  of  American  cities,  for  within 
a  few  years  of  the  first  settlement  of  the  Massachusetts 
colony,  a  general  law  was  passed  requiring  every  town  of 
more  than  fifty  families  to  appoint  a  schoolmaster  to  be 
paid  by  the  inhabitants  in  general,  and  in  case  of  larger 
towns  to  provide  a  grammar  school.  Although  it  soon 
became  the  general  rule  that  public  funds  should  be  used 
to  aid  in  providing  educational  facilities,  the  development 
of  free  school  facilities  supported  wholly  by  public  funds 
and  the  requirement  of  compulsory  attendance  did  not 
become  general  until  after  the  Civil  War.  But  in  this 
respect  the  United  States  were  distinctly  in  advance  of 
Great  Britain.  Cities  became  the  natural  units  for  the 
provision  of  public  education,  first  primary,  then  sec- 
ondary, and  finally,  in  some  cases,  also  higher  education. 

34  Among  the  many  works  on  school  administration  may  be  men- 
tioned especially  Dexter,  A  History  of  Education  in  the  United 
States  (New  York,  1906)  ;  Dutton  and  Snedden,  The  Administra- 
tion of  Public  Education  in  the  United  States  (New  York,  1913)  ; 
Cubberly,  History  of  Education  (Boston,  1920)  ;  Cubberly  and  El- 
liott, State  and  County  School  Administration  (New  York,  19x5)  ; 
and  Monroe,  A  Cyclopedia  of  Education  (New  York,  1911-1913). 
Current  problems  and  developments  are  discussed  in  the  reports 
of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Education,  in  the  proceedings  of 
the  National  Education  Associations,  and  in  the  special  educational 
periodicals. 


392  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

From  the  point  of  view  of  expenditure,  public  educa- 
tion is  to-day  by  all  odds  the  most  important  of  municipal 
functions.  This  is  clearly  shown  by  the  striking  fact 
that  in  19 17  in  the  cities  having  more  than  30,000 
inhabitants  the  expenses  for  schools  alone  constituted 
nearly  a  third  of  the  total  governmental  expenses,  more 
than  the  combined  expenses  for  police,  fire,  and  sanitation, 
and  health  departments.  Unlike  the  expenses  of  the 
police  departments,  moreover,  the  percentage  of  expen- 
ditures for  schools  increases  in  general  inversely  with 
the  size  of  the  city,  the  average  for  cities  between  30,000 
and  50,000  being  nearly  39  per  cent  of  the  total  expenses 
of  general  departments  and  diminishing  in  each  successive 
population  group,  though  the  per  capita  expenditures  vary 
directly  with  the  population  groups. 

Types  of  School  Administrations. —  The  first  striking 
feature  of  municipal  educational  administration  is  the 
fact  that  practically  everywhere  the  control  over  schools 
is  in  the  hands  of  a  board.  Though,  as  has  already  been 
pointed  out,  the  board  plan  for  administrative  depart- 
ments, which  was  formerly  very  common  and  much  in 
favor  in  our  cities,  has  been  gradually  abandoned  in 
favor  of  the  single  commissioner  type,  this  has  not  been 
true  of  the  administration  of  schools.  The  earliest  school 
administration  in  the  Massachusetts  towns  was  entrusted 
to  a  special  school  committee,  elected  at  the  annual  town 
meeting,  and  the  multiple  principle  has  scarcely  ever  been 
abandoned  in  this  branch  of  municipal  administration. 
The  principle  has  been  defended  on  the  ground  of  the  pe- 
culiar nature  of  educational  administration,  but  while  it 
is  true  that  promptness  of  decision  and  centralization  of 
power  are  not  as  imperative  in  the  conduct  of  schools  as 
in  the  case  of  the  police,  fire,  and  even  health  departments, 
the  problems  of  administration  are  not  so  different  in  this 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       393 

field  as  is  sometimes  asserted  in  defense  of  the  board 
system. 

A  second  characteristic  of  school  administration,  some- 
what less  general,  but  of  much  greater  significance,  is 
the  manner  of  constituting  the  educational  authority.  In 
the  majority  of  cities  the  school  board  is  chosen  by  popu- 
lar election,  though  in  a  number  of  cities  it  is  appointed 
either  by  the  mayor,  or  by  the  city  council,  or  by  the 
courts.  Consequently  the  school  board  in  the  typical 
city  constitutes  an  independent  authority  outside  of  the 
regular  city  government,  and  in  a  number  of  instances 
it  even  has  independent  powers  of  taxation.  From  the 
point  of  view  of  sound  principles  of  governmental  admin- 
istration there  is  nothing  to  be  said  for  the  independent 
school  authority.  The  system  is  generally  defended  on 
the  plea  that  schools  are  too  important  a  function  to  be  sub- 
jected to  "  politics  "  and  that  the  independently  elected 
school  board  is  required  to  keep  them  out  of  politics. 
The  main  weaknesses  of  this  position  seem  to  be  appar- 
ent. In  the  first  place,  it  may  be  questioned  whether 
school  administration  is  so  obviously  more  important 
than  police  protection  and  the  conservation  of  public 
health,  for  instance,  as  to  demand  a  departure  from  sound 
principles  of  unification  and  simplification.  In  the  second 
place  it  is  obvious  that  public  education  cannot  and  should 
not  be  taken  "  out  of  politics  "  in  the  sense  of  control  by 
public  opinion,  which  involves  the  determination  of  the 
relative  importance  to  be  accorded  to  this  function  of 
municipal  government  as  compared  with  the  other  activi- 
ties. In  the  third  place,  the  independent  school  board  has 
not  demonstrated  itself  to  be  beyond  the  reach  of  corrupt 
"  politics,"  while  the  lack  of  interest  in  school  elections 
frequently  results  in  the  selection  of  boards  that  are  in 
no  sense  representative.     Finally,  the  divorcing  of  this 


394  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

function  from  the  control  of  the  city  government  tends  to 
that  extent  to  diminish  still  further  the  already  too  limited 
interest  shown  by  citizens  in  municipal  affairs.  In  spite 
of  these  obvious  objections  to  the  independent  school  au- 
thority, it  has  the  support  of  most  of  the  persons  actively 
interested  in  school  administration  and  is  not  likely  to  be 
generally  abandoned.  It  should  be  said,  moreover,  that 
the  cities  in  which  the  school  board  is  appointed  by  the 
mayor,  the  theoretically  superior  system,  have  not  shown 
any  conclusive  evidence  of  their  superiority  in  the  re- 
spects enumerated  above  over  the  cities  with  the  elected 
boards. 

There  is  a  distinct  tendency  noticeable  to  reduce  the  size 
of  the  school  boards  and  even  in  the  large  cities  where 
boards  of  twenty  or  more  were  formerly  not  uncommon, 
the  typical  board  now  has  less  than  fifteen  members  and 
in  some  cases  as  few  as  five,  while  a  few  cities  have  sub- 
stituted a  single  elective  commissioner  for  the  board. 
The  advantages  of  the  small  board  of  five  over  the  much 
larger  boards  still  found  in  a  number  of  cities  are  too 
obvious  to  need  discussion.  In  the  election  of  school 
boards  women  have  very  generally  been  accorded  a  vote 
even  where  the  law  did  not  allow  them  any  other  partici- 
pation in  the  suffrage. 

The  school  board  has  control  of  the  physical  properties 
of  the  department  and  usually  controls  the  purchasing 
of  sites  and  the  erection  of  new  buildings.  It  also  has 
control  of  the  purchasing  of  supplies  and  the  business  ad- 
ministration of  the  system.  In  these  matters  it  commonly 
acts  through  committees  or  business  agents.  But  in  its 
control  over  the  educational  administration  it  practically 
everywhere  acts  through  a  specially  trained  official  known 
usually  as  the  superintendent  of  schools,  selected  by  the 
board  for  a  term  of  years  varying  from  one  or  two  to 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       395 

five  or  six.  This  official,  who  is  expected  to  be  a  trained 
educator,  is  chiefly  responsible  for  the  efficiency  of  the 
teaching  staff,  the  suitability  of  the  curriculum,  and  the 
general  improvement  of  educational  policies  and  instru- 
ments. These  positions  usually  command  relatively  high 
salaries.35  The  positions  below  the  superintendent  and 
assistant  superintendent  are  almost  universally  filled  on 
the  basis  of  examinations  or  other  evidence  of  fitness  such 
as  certificates  of  training  and  experience.  An  interesting 
development  during  the  year  19 19  was  the  growth  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Teachers,  affiliated  with  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  but  not  subject  to  the 
latter  in  the  calling  of  strikes.36  Contributions  to  teach- 
ers' pensions  are  not  so  general  in  cities  as  in  the  case 
of  policemen  and  firemen,  though  in  19 17  eight  of  the 
ten  largest  cities  reported  such  contributions  and  a  ma- 
jority of  the  cities  between  100,000  and  500,000  showed 
expenditures  for  teachers'  pensions. 

One  noteworthy  feature  of  the  personnel  of  the  school 
system,  both  urban  and  rural,  has  been  the  rapid  feminiza- 
tion of  the  teaching  profession.  In  1880  about  43  per 
cent  of  the  teachers  and  supervisory  officers  were  males 
while  in  19 17  only  16  per  cent  were  males.  A  number 
of  factors  have  contributed  to  this  development,  chief 
among  which  perhaps  are  the  low  salaries  paid  in  the 
teaching  profession  as  compared  with  other  occupations. 
In  19 1 7  the  average  annual  salary  paid  to  teachers  in 
public  elementary  schools,  rural  and  urban,  was  $635,  and 
while  city  schools  pay  on  an  average  much  more  than  the 
rural  schols,  the  salaries  even  here  are  much  too  small 
to  attract  and  keep  able  men. 

35  In  Chicago  the  superintendent  of  schools  was  recently  awarded 
a  salary  of  $18,000  a  year. 

36  See  The  American  Year  Book  for  1919,  pp.  808-810. 


396  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  Scope  of  Public  Education. —  The  scope  of  the  free 
public  education  offered  by  city  school  systems  has  in- 
creased enormously  and  is  continually  extending.  Be- 
ginning with  the  modest  but  significant  provision  of  a 
teacher  to  instruct  in  reading  and  writing  in  the  early 
Massachusetts  colonial  settlements,  the  scope  of  the  free 
public-school  system  has  expanded  to  include  success- 
ively an  eight-year  elementary,  or  grammar,  school,  a 
four-year  secondary,  or  high,  school,  and  in  a  few  cities  37 
an  institution  of  higher  education  of  college  grade.  At 
the  bottom  of  the  educational  system  free  public  kinder- 
gartens have  also  become  an  accepted  part  of  the  public- 
school  system.  A  recent  development  of  great  promise 
is  the  movement  for  junior  colleges  in  cities  which  carry 
on  the  educational  system  for  two  years  beyond  the  regu- 
lar high  school,  while  the  high  school  course  itself  tends 
to  be  separated  into  a  junior  high  school  and  a  senior  high 
school,  thus  separating  what  were  formerly  the  seventh 
and  eighth  grades  from  the  elementary  school,  and  in- 
creasing the  caliber  of  the  instruction  in  the  higher 
classes  of  the  secondary  school.  Furthermore  the  regular 
work  of  the  day  schools  has  been  supplemented  by  night 
schools  and  vacation  schools. 

The  character  of  the  curriculum  in  the  public  schools 
has  undergone  a  no  less  extensive  alteration.  Voca- 
tional education,  which  was  practically  unknown  in  our 
public-school  system  a  generation  or  so  ago,  is  now 
to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  a  recognized  part  of  the 
public-school  system  of  every  sizeable  city.  Added  im- 
petus has  recently  been  given  to  this  movement  by  the 
provisions  of  the  Smith-Hughes  Act  by  which  Federal 
aid  is  available  for  vocational  education.     Partly  as  a 

37  Notably  New  York  City ;  Cincinnati,  Toledo,  and  Akron  in 
Ohio;  Philadelphia;  and  Charleston,  South  Carolina. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       397 

result  of  this  legislation  there  has  been  a  considerable 
growth  in  the  number  of  continuation  schools  which 
recent  legislation  has  now  made  compulsory  in  over  half 
of  the  states. 

The  interest  of  the  state  as  a  whole  in  education 
has  already  been  pointed  out  in  the  discussion  of  rural 
education.  The  growth  in  the  control  of  local  educa- 
tion by  state  authorities  which  has  been  so  marked  in 
the  United  States  in  the  last  fifty  years  has  affected 
the  cities  less  than  the  other  school  districts  because  the 
minimum  requirements  set  up  by  the  states  have  us- 
ually been  lower  than  those  demanded  locally  in  the 
cities,  but  in  the  matter  of  examinations  for  teachers, 
the  selection  of  textbooks,  and  more  recently  in  spe- 
cific requirements  as  to  vocational  education,  cities  have 
felt  more  and  more  the  influence  of  the  state  authori- 
ties. iAt  the  same  time  it  is  still  characteristic  of  mu- 
nicipal school  administration  in  the  United  States  as 
compared  with  the  French  and  English  systems  that  a 
large  amount  of  autonomy  is  left  to  the  municipalities. 
As  long  as  the  educational  authorities  in  the  city  are 
likely  to  be  of  a  higher  type,  as  far  as  ability  and  free- 
dom from  political  influence  is  concerned,  than  the  state 
educational  authorities,  which  seems  to  be  the  case  in 
most  states  to-day,  little  would  seem  to  be  gained  from 
circumscribing  the  autonomy  of  the  latter  by  increas- 
ing the  power  of  interference  of  the  former. 

Public  Libraries. —  Schools  are  not  the  only  instru- 
ments of  public  education  that  are  provided  by  Ameri- 
can cities.  Public  libraries  are  also  agencies  of  great 
potentialities  from  an  educational  standpoint.  The  pro- 
vision of  public-library  facilities  is  one  of  the  few  di- 
rections in  this  country  in  which  private  beneficence 
has  played  any  appreciable  part  in  aiding  cities  to  serve 


398  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  public.  The  erection  of  a  library  building  has  in 
a  great  many  cities  been  wholly  or  partly  in  consequence 
of  a  private  gift.  But  the  maintenance  of  the  library 
is  commonly  left  entirely  to  the  city.  In  19 17  all  but 
one  of  the  sixty-six  cities  with  an  estimated  population 
of  more  than  100,000  reported  expenditures  for  public 
libraries,  with  an  average  per  capita  expenditure  of  $0.23. 
Of  the  173  cities  of  between  30,000  and  100,000  inhabi- 
tants all  but  eleven  reported  expenditures  for  public  li- 
braries, averaging  $0.19  per  capita. 

As  an  important  part  of  the  educational  facilities  of 
the  city  the  library  administration  should  obviously  be 
organically  connected  with  the  school  system,  especially 
in  view  of  the  wisdom  of  combining  branch  stations  with 
the  school  library  facilities,  but  as  a  rule  the  public  li- 
braries are  under  the  control  of  a  special  library  board 
or  other  separate  authority.  Those  specially  interested 
in  public  libraries  voice  the  same  objection  to  their  be- 
ing incorporated  with  the  rest  of  the  educational  sys- 
tem that  the  friends  of  the  school  system  urge  against 
having  that  incorporated  with  the  rest  of  the  city  gov- 
ernment. The  claim  is  made  that  the  director  of  pub- 
lic education  has  no  knowledge  of  or  real  interest  in 
public  libraries  and  that  the  latter  will  fare  better  if 
put  under  a  separate  administration.  It  is  possible 
that  the  pressure  which  a  library  board  and  a  library 
association  can  bring  to  bear  for  larger  appropriations 
out  of  the  city  treasury  is  likely  to  be  more  effective 
than  the  pressure  exercised  by  the  director  of  public 
education  for  Hbraries  as  one  of  the  activities  under  his 
control.  But  it  is  also  more  than  likely  that  the  money 
obtained  would  be  spent  with  a  good  deal  more  refer- 
ence to  the  educational  values  of  the  library  as  a  part 
of  the  general  educational   system   than   is  true   where 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       399 

the  interests  are  separate,  and,  because  of  the  limited 
funds  available,  inevitably  more  or  less  conflicting. 

Social  Welfare. —  Among  the  more  recent  municipal 
activities  to  develop  in  this  country  are  those  which,  for 
lack  of  a  better  term,  may  be  called  the  social  welfare 
activities  of  the  city.  For  purposes  of  this  discussion 
these  activities  may  be  regarded  as  those  directed  to- 
ward the  assistance  and  improvement  of  conditions  of 
those  citizens  who  are  wholly  or  in  part  economically 
dependent,  or  who  at  least  are  largely  dependent  upon 
public  undertakings  for  the  supply  of  those  factors  in 
existence  which,  if  not  to  be  classed  as  absolute  neces- 
sities of  a  bare  existence,  are  at  any  rate  recognized  as 
being  essential  parts  of  a  decent  existence. 

Poor  Relief. —  In  the  first  of  the  categories  fall  the 
activities  commonly  designated  as  charity  functions  or 
poor  relief.  Traditionally,  as  we  have  seen,  this  is  re- 
garded in  this  country  generally  as  primarily  a  county 
function.  But  while  the  county  has  been  made  by  law 
the  general  agency  for  poor  relief,  at  least  of  outdoor 
relief,  the  city  has  also  generally  been  given  power  to 
care  for  the  poor  within  its  limits.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
poverty  has  made  itself  more  acutely  evident  in  city 
life  than  in  the  rural  sections,  and  it  is  the  cities  that 
are  confronted  with  the  more  serious  aspects  of  pau- 
perism. Yet  until  within  comparatively  recent  times  poor 
relief  in  the  cities  has  not  been  very  extensively  under- 
taken by  the  city  governments  but  has  been  left  very 
largely  to  the  private  activities  of  churches  and  other 
benevolent  institutions.  To-day  the  great  majority  of 
cities  of  over  30,000  people  are  spending  something  for 
outdoor  poor  relief,  but  the  total  amount  reported  for 
this  function  in  191 7  was  less  than  four  million  dollars, 
or  about  $0.12  per  capita,  a  very  small  amount  com- 


4oo  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

pared  to  the  sums  spent  by  private  charities.  In  addi- 
tion to  this,  however,  over  forty  millions  were  spent  by 
these  cities  on  poor  institutions,  the  care  of  children, 
hospitals,  insane  institutions,  and  other  charities.  So 
far  as  institutional  care  is  concerned  there  seems  to  be 
general  agreement  that  the  city  is  the  logical  agency  for 
meeting  the  need,  but  in  the  matter  of  outdoor  relief  the 
tendency  is  still  to  rely  largely  on  private  charitable  un- 
dertakings. But  the  evils  of  unscientific,  indiscriminate, 
and  overlapping  activities  in  the  giving  of  outdoor  relief 
are  so  obvious  that  the  centralization  of  these  activities 
in  the  hands  of  a  properly  directed  city  welfare  depart- 
ment would  seem  to  be  the  best  solution.  This  would 
not  necessarily  mean  the  impersonal  machine-like  per- 
formance of  an  activity  that  calls  for  human  interest 
and  sympathy  nor  the  elimination  of  the  expression  of 
the  charitable  instinct  in  voluntary  contributions,  but  it 
should  mean  substituting  unified  and  effective  direction 
for  the  now  frequently  misdirected  energy  of  private  un- 
dertakings. 

Above  that  element  of  the  population  which  is  in  need 
of  food,  shelter,  and  clothing,  is  the  group,  normally 
large  in  every  city,  which,  while  able  to  provide  itself 
with  these  necessities,  is  not  able  to  meet  the  expenses 
of  extraordinary  emergencies  such  as  sickness  and  legal 
difficulties.  For  this  class  of  people  some  of  the  more 
progressive  cities  are  providing  free  medical  and  legal 
service.  It  is  in  the  long  run  a  wiser  as  well  as  more 
humane  practice  for  cities  to  furnish  this  aid  without 
cost  than  to  permit  the  unfortunates  either  to  suffer  un- 
necessary hardships  or  to  become  out  and  out  depend- 
ents upon  the  community.  For  the  same  reason  public 
employment  agencies  to  meet  one  of  the  ever  pressing 
dangers  of  the  class  of  people  who  are  just  on  the  edge 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       401 

of   dependency  have  been  established   in  a  number  of 
cities. 

Public  Recreation. —  Not  far  removed  from  these  more 
material  needs  of  a  considerable  portion  of  city  dwell- 
ers are  their  recreational  needs.  From  one  point  of  view, 
of  course,  public-recreation  facilities  can  be  justified 
on  the  ground  of  public-health  considerations,  for  per- 
sons, especially  children,  who  are  without  proper  facili- 
ties for  healthful  play  and  exercise  deteriorate  physically. 
But  no  less  important  is  this  consideration  from  the  so- 
cial-welfare point  of  view,  for  the  possibility  of  pleas- 
ant and  healthful  recreation  is  a  vital  factor  in  the  state 
of  mind  of  the  great  mass  of  workers.  Sufficient  lei- 
sure for  recreation  is,  of  course,  a  fundamental  condi- 
tion, but  that  is  a  matter  which  the  city  as  such  does  not 
control.  It  is,  however,  within  the  power  of  the  city  to 
see  that  opportunities  for  free,  sane  recreation  are  pro- 
vided for  all  elements  in  the  population  that  are  un- 
able to  meet  the  expense  of  commercial  amusements,  and 
in  this  respect  American  cities  are  beginning  to  make 
notable  progress. 

Until  within  recent  years  the  chief  emphasis  in  this 
direction  has  been  placed  by  cities  upon  public  parks. 
But  the  value  of  public  parks  as  recreational  facilities 
has  often  been  greatly  diminished  by  their  inaccessi- 
bility to  the  portions  of  the  city  population  that  most 
needed  them,  and  by  the  failure  to  make  them  true  play- 
grounds. The  growth  of  the  playground  movement, 
especially  for  children  in  congested  areas,  but  also  by 
the  provision  for  baseball,  tennis,  and  other  athletic  games 
for  adults  has  been  the  most  significant  development  of 
recent  times  in  the  field  of  municipal  social-welfare  activ- 
ities. To  these  may  be  added  such  facilities  as  bathing 
beaches,  and  swimming  pools  which  are  becoming  mu- 


4Q2  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

nicipal  undertakings  in  an  increasing  number  of  cities 
each  year,  while  municipal  theaters,  concerts,  lectures, 
museums,  and  zoological  gardens  combine  recreational 
and  educational  features.  Community  pageants,  plays, 
and  similar  undertakings  are  proving  their  value  as  recrea- 
tional undertakings  calculated  to  create  a  real  community 
feeling,  while  community  houses  and  other  social  centers 
are  proving  worth  while  undertakings  for  the  city  for 
like  reasons.  The  so-called  Americanization  movement, 
better  termed  a  citizenship  movement,  will  depend  largely 
for  its  success  on  the  recreational  appeal  it  makes,  and 
its  benefits  will  be  conferred  upon  all  the  inhabitants  of 
the  city,  whether  native-born  or  foreigners.  The  intia- 
tive  for  all  these  new  developments  has  been  largely  in 
private  hands,  but  the  establishment  of  special  recrea- 
tional departments  or  commissions  in  a  growing  num- 
ber of  cities  proves  that  our  municipalities  are  waking 
up  to  their  obligations  and  opportunities  in  this  regard.38 
Public  Works.39  —  Public  works,  for  purposes  of 
this  discussion,  may  be  regarded  as  those  services  fur- 

38  Among  the  agencies  which  have  been  particularly  active  in  the 
development  of  recreation  in  cities  may  be  mentioned  especially 
the  American  Playground  and  Recreation  Association,  now  operat- 
ing as  Community  Service,  whose  publications  deal  with  the  progress 
made  in  this  direction.  Among  books  dealing  with  various  phases 
of  this  matter  may  be  mentioned,  Ward,  The  Social  Center  (New 
York,  1913)  ;  the  volume  of  the  Annals  of  the  American  Academy 
of  Political  and  Social  Science,  on  "  Public  Recreation  Facilities," 
March,  1910;  and  Mero,  American  Playgrounds  (New  York,  1909). 

39  There  is  a  very  extensive  literature  on  the  subject  of  munic- 
ipal engineering  in  general  and  on  particular  branches  of  municipal 
public  works.  One  of  the  best  general  treatments  for  the  student 
of  municipal  administration  is  Whinery,  Municipal  Public  Works 
(New  York,  1903).  A  more  elaborate  treatment  may  be  found  in 
Baker,  Municipal  Engineering  and  Sanitation  (New  York,  1906)  ; 
and  a  valuable  reference  work  is  Maxwell  and  Brown,  Encyclo- 
pedia of  Municipal  and  Sanitary  Engineering  (New  York,  1910). 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      403 

nished  by  the  city  which  involve  considerable  permanent 
outlays  for  their  construction  and  the  application  of  en- 
gineering science  for  their  erection  and  operation.  They 
may  be  distinguished  from  public  utilities,  to  be  consid- 
ered in  the  next  section,  principally  in  that  they  have 
been  found  to  be  services  which,  because  of  their  vital 
importance  to  the  welfare  of  the  city,  cannot  well  be 
left  to  private  profit-seeking  undertakings.  Chief  among 
these  activities,  aside  from  the  erection  of  public  build- 
ings used  in  the  other  activities  of  the  city,  may  be  men- 
tioned the  care  of  the  streets,  the  provision  of  a  pure 
water  supply,  and  the  collection  and  disposal  of  the 
sewage.  All  three  of  these  major  activities  have  very 
generally  been  imposed  upon  cities  by  law. 

Highway  Maintenance. —  In  the  care  of  the  city's 
streets  the  first  problem  is  that  of  paving.  As  far  as 
the  legal  obligation  of  the  city  is  concerned  nothing  more 
is  demanded  than  that  the  streets  shall  be  kept  in  such 
condition  as  not  to  be  dangerous  to  persons  and  vehicles 
using  them.  But  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  city  much 
more  is  demanded.  Pavements  must  be  suitable  for 
traffic  in  the  first  place.  They  must  be  easily  cleaned. 
They  should  be  as  dustless  and  as  noiseless  as  possible. 
To  find  a  pavement  that  meets  all  of  these  requirements 
is  not  so  simple,  especially  as  climatic  conditions  also 
play  an  important  part.  And  then  there  is  the  very  im- 
portant element  of  expense  to  be  considered.  Formerly 
wood  blocks  were  in  very  general  use  for  paving  mater- 
ial, superseding  the  old  cobblestone  pavements.  Then 
brick  pavements,  granite  block,  and  macadam  came  to 
be  used  very  generally.  Now  the  tendency  is  all  in  the 
direction  of  the  solid  surface  or  sheet  pavements  under 
a  variety  of  different  forms,  from  relatively  soft  asphalt 
to  the  hardest  of  concrete  pavements.     From  the  point 


404  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  view  of  traffic  each  of  these  various  kinds  of  pave- 
ment has  distinct  merits  and  defects.  Of  especial  signifi- 
cance is  the  rapid  change  from  horsedrawn  traffic  to  motor 
propelled  traffic  which  has  occurred  within  the  last  twenty 
years.  In  the  matter  of  expense  the  availability  of  ma- 
terials plays  a  large  part,  and,  of  course,  the  question  of 
durability  is  as  important  as  the  original  outlay. 

Street  paving,  as  distinguished  from  such  services  as 
police,  fire,  and  health  protection,  which  are  administered 
as  general  services  for  all  the  inhabitants,  is  regarded 
in  a  sense  as  a  special  service  to  the  property  owners 
abutting  on  the  streets  and  this  special  service  is  charged 
to  them  in  the  form  of  special  assessments.  The  propor- 
tion of  street-paving  expense  paid  by  the  abutting  prop- 
erty owners  varies  greatly  in  different  cities,  but  every- 
where it  is  considerable.  Very  frequently  also  the  pav- 
ing of  a  street  is  made  dependent  on  approval  by  a 
majority  of  the  propery  owners  on  that  street,  in  recog- 
nition of  the  special  burden  imposed  upon  them.  But 
as  the  amount  of  the  assessment  paid  by  them  is  not 
supposed  to  exceed  the  increase  in  the  value  of  the 
property  they  own,  in  consequence  of  the  pavement,  the 
public  interest  in  a  properly  paved  street  should  not  be 
prejudiced  by  the  unwillingness  of  the  property  owners 
to  contribute  their  share  of  the  expense.  American  cities 
have  entered  so  extensively  on  a  program  of  street  pav- 
ing that  they  have  in  many  cases  reached  the  limit  of 
the  financial  ability  of  the  city  to  contribute  even  its 
share  of  the  expense  of  further  paving. 

Keeping  the  streets  in  repair  after  they  have  been  once 
paved  is  more  generally  regarded  as  a  general  obligation, 
but  in  some  cities  the  abutting  property  owners  are  as- 
sessed even  for  this  purpose.  It  is  hard  to  see  any  justice 
in  this,  however,  as  the  deterioration  of  the  streets  is 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      4^5 

not  caused  to  any  appreciable  extent  by  the  use  made  of 
them  by  the  abutting  owners. 

Other  aspects  of  the  care  of  the  streets  that  make 
heavy  demands  upon  the  finances  of  the  city  are  the 
cleaning  and  lighting  of  streets.  Cleaning  is  required 
not  merely  from  the  point  of  view  of  traffic  considera- 
tion but  also  from  considerations  of  sanitation,  comfort, 
and  beauty.  In  most  of  the  Northern  cities  of  America 
the  matter  of  snow  removal  from  the  streets  presents  a 
very  difficult  problem.  Street  lighting  is  demanded  both 
for  traffic  safety  and  for  protecting  the  citizens  from 
crime  at  night  and  most  cities  now  spend  considerable 
sums  in  street  lighting.  The  commonest  forms  of  light- 
ing to-day  are  gas  and  electricity,  with  the  trend  dis- 
tinctly away  from  the  former  method,  which  was  the  type 
of  street  lighting  first  perfected.  Finally  the  matter  of 
traffic  regulation  must  be  considered  not  only  for  the 
purpose  of  avoiding  accidents  but  also  for  the  purpose  of 
increasing  the  efficiency  of  streets  in  the  performance  of 
their  function  as  arteries  of  traffic. 

Sidewalks  are  for  pedestrians  what  the  streets  are  for 
vehicles.  They  must  be  properly  laid,  cleaned,  and  kept 
in  repair.  But  although  the  sidewalks  are  almost  uni- 
versally the  property  of  the  city,  the  duty  of  laying  them 
and  keeping  them  in  repair  and  clean  is  generally  put 
wholly  upon  the  abutting  property  owner. 

The  Public  Water  Supply. — The  second  main  activity 
of  cities  under  the  head  of  public  works  is  the  furnishing 
of  a  pure  and  adequate  water  supply.  It  has  already 
been  pointed  out  how  essential  such  a  supply  is  to  the 
health  of  the  inhabitants.  It  is  also  of  fundamental  im- 
portance in  the  matter  of  protection  against  fire.  For 
these  reasons  water  supplies  are  now  almost  universally 
municipal   undertakings   in   this   country,   though   at   an 


4o6  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

earlier  date  private  companies  furnished  water  under 
franchises  and  continue  to  furnish  it  in  some  of  the 
smaller  cities  to-day.  There  seems  to  be  no  question  that 
this  service  is  one  which  the  city  itself  should  undertake. 

In  some  cities  the  adequacy  of  the  water  supply  pre- 
sents a  difficult  problem.  Most  cities,  it  is  true,  grew  up 
on  streams  or  other  bodies  of  water  in  the  first  place,  be- 
cause the  matter  of  a  water  supply  was  of  prime  impor- 
lance  for  every  settlement.  But  in  many  cases  the  or- 
iginal supply,  even  when  not  rendered  unfit  for  use  by 
increased  congestion  of  population  and  industrial  uses, 
has  become  inadequate  for  the  larger  city  that  developed. 
Almost  everywhere,  moreover,  the  pollution  of  the  water 
supply,  if  a  surface  supply,  has  forced  the  city  either  to 
seek  its  water  elsewhere  or  to  install  purification  works. 
New  York  City  and  Los  Angeles  are  recent  examples  of 
American  cities  that  have  sought  their  municipal  water 
supply  a  hundred  or  more  miles  away  in  the  mountains 
at  tremendous  initial  expense.  The  erection  of  pumping 
stations,  the  networks  of  water  mains,  the  provision  of 
fire  hydrants,  are  among  the  less  difficult  though  expen- 
sive engineering  phases  of  the  water-supply  problem. 
Of  chief  importance  are  the  purification  works  which 
vary  all  the  way  from  simple  settling  basins  to  elaborate 
filter  systems  calculated  to  remove  not  merely  inorganic 
impurities  but  pathogenic  bacteria  as  well. 

American  cities  as  a  rule  show  a  much  larger  per  capita 
consumption  of  water  than  do  European  cities.  Part  of 
this  is  due  to  the  more  general  use  of  sanitary  facilities 
employing  water,  but  in  large  part  it  is  also  due  to  waste, 
either  through  imperfect  mains  and  pipes  or  by  individual 
carelessness.  To  limit  individual  extravagance  of  water 
users  cities  are  more  and  more  adopting  the  plan  of  me- 
tering houses  and  manufacturing  plants  and  charging  a 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      407 

water  rate  based  on  actual  use.  This  has  the  added  ad- 
vantage also  of  enabling  the  city  to  check  up  on  its  own 
use  of  water  and  to  discover  wastage  due  to  imperfect 
systems. 

The  total  value  of  land,  buildings,  and  equipment  of 
municipal  water  supply  systems  in  19 17  in  the  172  cities 
of  more  than  30,000  inhabitants  which  reported  such 
properties  was  more  than  $1,611,197,516,  or  considerably 
more  than  half  of  the  total  value  of  the  land,  buildings, 
and  equipment  of  all  the  general  departments,  including 
city  halls,  police  and  fire  stations,  hospitals  and  other  in- 
stitutions, parks,  schools,  libraries,  etc. 

Sewerage  System. —  Closely  connected  with  the  water 
supply  is  the  matter  of  sewerage,  for  most  of  the  water 
that  is  furnished  to  private  users  by  the  city  has  to  be 
carried  off  again  after  use.  But  the  waste  water  carried 
off  from  houses  and  taken  care  of  by  the  system  of  so- 
called  sanitary  sewers  is  only  one  part  of  the  problem, 
and  not  the  most  difficult  one.  For  in  addition  to  this 
outflow,  which  is  fairly  constant  and  easily  computed,  is 
the  surface  drainage  resulting  from  snow  and  rainfall. 
Here  the  problem  is  complicated  by  the  necessity  of  tak- 
ing care  of  immense  amounts  of  water  in  a  brief  space 
of  time  and  frequently  necessitates  a  system  of  storm 
sewers  in  addition  to  the  sanitary  sewers. 

Then  there  remains  the  problem  of  final  disposal  of 
the  sewage.  Formerly  cities  simply  conducted  the  sew- 
age to  the  nearest  stream  or  body  of  water  and  deposited 
it  there.  This  is  still  possible  in  the  case  of  cities  located 
on  the  seaboard,  but  in  the  case  of  cities  located  on 
streams  or  lakes,  the  dangers  to  other  communities  from 
the  pollution  of  streams  on  which  they  are  located  has 
led  many  states  within  recent  years  to  pass  anti-stream 
pollution    laws    which   have    necessitated   the   treatment 


408  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  sewage  by  cities  before  discharging  it  into  lakes  and 
rivers.  There  are  a  number  of  different  ways  of  treat- 
ing sewage,  from  mere  screening  or  by  sedimentation 
to  elaborate  treatment  in  septic  tanks  or  filtration  beds. 
Such  treatment  is  not  intended,  however,  to  make  the  ef- 
fluent, or  liquid  which  is  carried  off,  even  approximately 
pure  after  treatment  but  chiefly  to  reduce  the  noxious 
character  of  the  sewage  and  make  it  possible  for  com- 
munities that  rely  on  the  stream  into  which  the  effluent 
is  emptied  to  make  the  water  supply  fit  for  use  without 
too  great  effort.  But  the  number  of  American  cities 
which  operate  really  effective  sewage  disposal  works, 
though  steadily  increasing  is  still  relatively  small. 

Public  Utilities.40  —  For  purposes  of  this  discussion 
we  may  define  public  utilities  as  those  businesses,  which, 
either  because  they  are  natural  monopolies  or  because  they 
involve  a  special  use  of  public  property,  are  regarded  as 
so  affected  with  public  interest  that  they  are  subject  to 
special  control  by  the  government.  They  are  distinguish- 
able from  the  fundamental  public  services  such  as  police, 
fire,  and  health  protection  chiefly  in  that  they  have  a 
saleable  commodity  which  private  capital  has  found  it 
profitable  to  supply.  Chief  among  them,  in  addition  to 
the  water  supply  and  sewerage  systems  which  were  in- 
cluded under  the  head  of  public  works  because  they  are 
so  generally  furnished  by  the  cities  themselves,  may  be 
mentioned  light  and  power  plants,  telephones,  street  rail- 
ways, docks'  and  wharves,  markets,  etc. 

40  Among  the  numerous  general  discussions  of  this  subject  refer- 
ence may  be  made  especially  to  King,  editor,  The  Regulation  of 
Municipal  Utilities  (New  York,  1912)  ;  Wilcox,  Municipal  Fran- 
chises (New  York,  1910)  ;  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of 
Political  and  Social  Science,  "  Municipal  Ownership  and  Municipal 
Franchises,"  June,  1906;  ibid.,  "The  Control  of  Municipal  Public 
Service  Corporations,"  May,  1908. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      409 

There  are  two  main  aspects  of  the  public  utility  prob- 
lem in  cities.  One  is  the  question  of  the  relation  of  the 
city  government  to  the  private  corporations  supplying 
these  public  utilities.  The  other  is  the  question  of  the 
city  itself  owning  and  operating  these  utilities.  These 
two  aspects  are  generally  considered  under  the  heads 
of  the  regulation  of  municipal  utilities,  and  municipal 
ownership  of  public  utilities,  respectively.  Although  they 
constitute  distinct  phases  of  the  public-utility  problem 
they  are  closely  connected  with  each  other,  as  will  appear. 

Privately  Owned  Municipal  Utilities. —  Cities  have 
very  generally  been  given  the  power  in  this  country  to 
grant  franchises  to  public-utility  corporations.  These 
franchises  gave  the  corporations  the  right  to  use  the  city 
streets,  sometimes  under  legislative  authority  granting 
a  monopoly  right,  and  on  the  other  hand  stipulated  or 
were  supposed  to  stipulate  conditions  of  service  and  the 
charges  to  be  made  for  the  same.  At  an  earlier  period 
of  municipal  history  it  was  not  uncommon  for  the  legis- 
lature itself  to  confer  these  privileges  upon  corporations, 
but  the  abuse  of  this  power  led,  as  has  been  seen,  to  the 
very  general  insertion  of  constitutional  prohibitions  upon 
the  exercise  of  this  power.  The  power  of  regulation 
involved  in  the  franchise  granting  power  was,  however, 
frequently  little  used  and  the  abuses  of  franchise  grants 
by  cities  were  as  flagrant  as  in  the  earlier  legislative  fran- 
chises. The  common  law,  it  is  true,  permitted  some 
limitations  on  public-service  corporations  in  the  direction 
of  insisting  upon  reasonable  service  and  reasonable  rates 
even  without  franchise  safeguards,  but  this  power  was 
largely  negatived  by  the  positive  grant  in  franchises  of 
privileges  without  express  restrictions.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  regulatory  power  of  cities  was  restricted  by 
the  judicial   limitations   against   unjust   stipulations   de- 


4io  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

rived  from  the  due  process  clauses  of  the  Federal  and 
state  constitutions. 

Under  a  properly  drawn  franchise  both  the  city  and 
users  could  be  safeguarded  against  extortion  by  the  com- 
panies. So  long  as  the  operation  of  municipal  utilities 
under  loose  franchises  proved  profitable  to  the  private 
corporations  little  was  done  until  recent  years  to  protect 
the  public.  Now  that  the  increased  cost  of  operation  has 
made  the  formerly  liberal  provisions  as  to  rates  and  ser- 
vice unprofitable  to  the  corporations,  the  courts  are  giv- 
ing them  relief,  often  with  too  little  regard  for  the  fact 
that  the  present  capitalization  on  which  the  returns  are 
estimated  represents  watered  stock,  that  is,  values  which 
themselves  represent  the  capitalization  of  the  formerly 
unreasonable  profits.  The  power  of  cities  to  prescribe 
rates  has  become,  therefore,  largely  a  negative  power 
and  even  the  conditions  of  service,  which  of  course  are 
intimately  connected  with  the  rates,  are  only  subject  to 
the  control  of  the  city  to  a  limited  extent. 

Of  recent  years,  in  fact,  there  has  been  a  growing  ten- 
dency to  take  the  whole  matter  of  public-utility  regula- 
tion out  of  the  hands  of  the  cities  and  put  it  into  the  hands 
of  state  commissions.  There  is  a  good  deal  to  be  said 
in  favor  of  this  plan.  Many  utilities  that  were  formerly 
separate  for  each  city  have  become  interurban  utilities, 
such  as  light  and  power  plants,  telephones,  and  street 
railways  and  cannot  satisfactorily  be  left  to  regulation  by 
a  number  of  separate  municipalities.  Furthermore  the 
proper  supervision  and  regulation  of  these  utilities  pre- 
sent administrative  problems  which  single  cities  cannot 
adequately  handle,  especially  smaller  cities,  because  of 
the  technical  expertness  required.  On  the  other  hand 
state  utility  commissions  become  the  focus  for  the  whole 
powerful  pressure  of  the  public-utility  corporations  and 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       411 

if  they  yield  to  that  pressure,  as  in  some  instances  they 
have,  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  are  powerless.  If  the 
regulation  is  in  the  hands  of  a  local  commission,  the  citi- 
zens have  the  power  of  remedying  evils  themselves 
through  their  control  over  the  city  government,  a  power 
which,  it  is  true,  they  have  by  no  means  always  used  to 
its  full  extent.  On  this  point,  therefore,  a  marked  di- 
vergence of  views  is  noticeable. 

Municipal  Ownership  of  Public  Utilities. —  The  unfor- 
tunate experience  of  most  American  cities  with  the  public- 
utlity  corporations  has  led  to  a  growing  conviction  that 
the  only  way  out  of  the  difficulty  of  regulation  is  the  own- 
ership and  operation  of  these  utilities  by  the  city  itself. 
In  the  case  of  the  water  supply,  as  has  been  seen,  there 
has  been  such  general  concurrence  in  the  desirability  of 
public  ownership  and  operation  that  public  ownership 
has  all  but  completely  supplanted  private  ownership. 
The  same  may  be  said  to  be  true  of  sewerage.  But  as  re- 
gards the  other  public  utilities  no  such  unanimity  of  opin- 
ion has  been  attained.  It  is  not  possible  here  to  consider 
in  detail  the  arguments  for  and  against  the  municipal 
ownership  and  operation  of  the  other  public  utilities. 
But  it  may  be  pointed  out  that  the  arguments  both  pro 
and  con  rest  more  largely  on  theoretical  and  philosophic 
considerations  than  on  actual  facts.  The  movement  for 
public  ownership  and  operation  has  unquestionably  been 
growing  in  American  cities  in  recent  years,  but  American 
cities  are  still  a  long  way  behind  English  municipalities 
in  this  regard.  Political,  social,  and  economic  considera- 
tions all  play  an  important  part  in  the  discussion  of  this 
question,  but  in  actual  fact  the  adoption  of  the  policy 
of  municipal  ownership  has  very  largely  been  dictated 
in  a  particular  city  by  the  experience  of  abuses  under  pri- 
vate ownership  which  led  to  the  radical  cure  by  public 


412  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ownership  without  very  serious  consideration  of  the  prob- 
lems and  difficulties  involved  in  the  remedy. 

The  utilities  most  commonly  owned  and  operated  by 
American  cities  of  more  than  30,000  inhabitants,  aside 
from  waterworks  and  sewerage,  are  cemeteries,  markets, 
docks  and  wharves,  and  electric  and  gas  plants.  But 
ferries,  toll-bridges,  city  farms,  ice-plants,  and  slaughter 
houses  are  among  the  undertakings  that  appear  in  iso- 
lated instances.  Curiously  enough,  street  railways,  which 
are  not  only  among  the  most  important  of  modern  muni- 
cipal utilities,  but  are  very  generally  municipalized  in 
English  cities  are  municipally  owned  and  operated  in  only 
a  few  cities  of  the  United  States.41  But  this  is  due  in  part 
at  least  to  the  fact  that  cities  have  not  until  recently  been 
accorded  the  power  to  own  and  operate  street-railway 
systems.  There  is  a  strong  demand  for  municipaliza- 
tion of  street  railways  in  a  number  of  the  larger  cities 
of  the  country  and  the  financial  straits  in  which  many 
private  companies  find  themselves  under  the  present  high 
costs  of  labor  and  materials  has  changed  the  attitude  of  a 
number  of  corporation  executives  towards  municipal  ac- 
quisition and  operation   from  hostility  to  hospitality.42 

City  Planning.43 — In  some  respects  city  planning, 
that  is,  the  conscious  direction  of  the  manner  of  the  city's 
establishment,  its  growth,  and  physical  improvement  is 
one  of  the  oldest  of  city  functions,  since  it  is  known 
that  some  of  the  cities  of  antiquity  were  laid  out  in  ac- 

41  Among  these  may  be  mentioned  San  Francisco  and  Seattle. 

42  In  addition  to  public  utilities  a  number  of  American  cities  own 
and  operate  what  are  termed  municipal  utilities,  that  is,  under- 
takings that  serve  the  city  as  such  but  not  the  public. 

43  The  literature  of  city  planning  in  this  country  is  almost  wholly 
the  product  of  the  last  ten  years,  but  it  has  in  that  time  attained 
very    considerable    proportions.     Among    the    more    useful    general 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      413 

cordance  with  plans  drawn  up  by  famous  architects. 
Like  other  features  of  ancient  cities,  however,  this  func- 
tion practically  disappeared  during  the  Middle  Ages  when 
cities  were  founded  and  grew  up  without  any  conscious 
direction.  But  since  that  period  European  cities,  es- 
pecially the  capitals  like  London  and  Paris,  have  been 
more  and  more  developed  on  the  physical  side  with  ref- 
erence to  comprehensive  city  plans.  In  this  country  too 
we  find  cities  originally  laid  out  in  accordance  with  pre- 
pared plans,  notably  Philadelphia  and  Washington.  But 
the  idea  of  city  planning  as  a  scientific  and  comprehensive 
factor  in  municipal  development  is  of  very  recent  general 
application  in  the  United  States. 

The  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  modern  city 
plan  as  compared  with  the  earlier  efforts  of  cities  is  its 
comprehensiveness.  It  is  not  concerned  merely  with  the 
width  and  arrangement  of  streets,  though  that  is  a  fun- 
damental part  of  city  planning.  Nor  is  it  concerned 
chiefly  with  the  beauty  of  parks,  boulevards,  public  build- 
ings, and  monuments.  It  goes  much  deeper  than  that  into 
city  development  for  it  comprises  the  regulation  of  build- 
ing zones,  the  treatment  of  the  transportation  terminals, 
the  whole  housing  problem,  the  location  of  recreation 
facilities,  and  the  architecture  and  location  of  public 
buildings,  etc.  In  fact  the  comprehensive  city  plan  comes 
into  contact  with  practically  every  one  of  the  city's 
activities. 

Interest   in  the  city-planning  movement  is  of   recent 

works  may  be  mentioned,  Robinson,  The  Improvement  of  Towns 
and  Cities,  fourth  edition  (New  York,  1913)  ;  Nolen,  City  Planning 
(Mew  York,  1916)  ;  Bird,  Town  Planning  for  Small  Communities 
(New  York,  1917)  ;  and  Nolen,  Re  planning  Small  Cities  (New 
York,  1912).  Of  special  value  are  the  Proceedings  of  the  National 
Conference  on  City  Planning  published  annually  since  1910,  while 
the  numerous  city-planning  reports  in  particular  cities  show  the 
progress  of  the  movement. 


4H  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

growth  in  the  United  States  and  even  where  interest  has 
developed  the  activities  of  cities  in  this  direction  have 
been  hampered  seriously  by  lack  of  powers  and  even  by 
positive  constitutional  hindrances.  But  since  19 10  there 
has  been  a  great  increase  in  state  laws  specifically  author- 
izing cities  to  establish  city-planning  commissions  and 
removing  some  of  the  restrictions  which  interfered  with 
their  effectiveness.  In  19 17  over*  fifty  of  the  cities  with 
more  than  30,000  inhabitants  reported  expenditures  for 
city-planning  purposes,  and  in  the  last  three  years  a  con- 
siderable number  of  other  cities  have  undertaken  such 
activities.44  But  the  wide  scope  and  fundamental  im- 
portance of  the  city  plan  has  by  no  means  been  generally 
recognized  even  in  those  cities  in  which  the  beginning  has 
been  made  in  the  direction  of  city  planning. 

Municipal  Finances  45 

Sources  of  Municipal  Revenue. —  The  most  pressing 
of  the  problems  of  municipal  finance  is  that  of  securing 
increased  sources  of  revenue.  The  principal  classes  of 
revenue  receipts  in  19 17  for  cities  of  more  than  30,000 
population,  with  the  percentage  of  total  revenue  receipts 
derived  from  each  were  as  follows:  property  taxes,  in- 
cluding the  general  property  tax,  special  property  taxes, 
and  poll  taxes,  64  per  cent,  of  which  proportion  the  gen- 
eral property  tax  alone  yielded  more  than  97  per  cent; 
earnings  of  public  service  enterprises,  10  per  cent;  special 
assessments,  7.8  per  cent;  business  and  non-business  li- 
cense taxes,  5.6  per  cent ;  highway  privileges,  rents,  and 
interest,   5.5  per  cent;  subventions,  grants,  gifts,  dona- 

44  See  the  American  Year  Book  for  1917,  1918,  and  1919. 

45  There  is  no  general  work  available  on  municipal  finances.  Spe- 
cial references  will,  therefore,  be  given  under  the  various  phases 
discussed. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      415 

tions,  and  pension  assessments,   4.1    per  cent;   and   all 
other  sources  of  revenue  receipts,  3  per  cent. 

By  far  the  most  important  source  of  revenue  receipts 
for  cities,  as  for  counties,  therefore,  is  the  general  prop- 
erty tax,  and  the  objections  that  have  already  been  brought 
out  in  discussing  this  kind  of  taxation  apply  equally  to 
the  cities  and  the  counties.  Furthermore,  aside  from  its 
defects  as  a  method  of  taxation,  the  limit  of  productive- 
ness of  this  source  of  income  has  been  reached  in  the 
great  mass  of  cities,  because  the  constitutional  limita- 
tions as  to  the  general  property  tax  rate  have  in  most 
cases  been  reached  or  closely  approached.  Generally 
speaking  cities  employ  their  own  assessors  for  making- 
valuations  of  property  for  purposes  of  taxation.  In  a 
number  of  states,  however,  some  or  all  of  the  cities  em- 
ploy no  assessors  but  report  to  a  larger  unit,  usually  the 
county,  in  some  cases  the  township,  the  amount  required 
to  be  raised  for  city  purposes,  and  the  county  then,  using 
its  own  valuation  of  property  within  the  city,  generally 
collects  the  tax  and  turns  it  over  to  the  city.46  Theo- 
retically there  is  good  reason  for  putting  the  assessing 
function  in  the  hands  of  a  single  authority,  for  where  the 
city  and  the  county  each  exercise  this  power  there  is  a 
useless  duplication  of  the  expensive  assessing  process  and 
frequently  a  considerable  discrepancy  in  the  valuation  of 
the  same  property  for  purposes  of  the  general  property 
tax.  In  practice,  however,  as  has  been  seen,  the  assess- 
ing function  is  in  general  very  poorly  performed  by  the 
county  officials,  and  unless  the  assessing  process  is  made 
subject  to  effective  supervision  and  control  by  the  state, 

4(5  Among  the  states  in  which  this  system  is  found  are  Alabama, 
Arkansas,  California,  Colorado,  Connecticut,  Idaho,  Illinois,  Indiana, 
Iowa,  Kansas,  Louisiana,  Minnesota,  Missouri,  Montana,  Nebraska, 
North  Carolina,  Ohio,  Oklahoma,  Oregon,  South  Carolina,  Tennes- 
see, Utah,  Washington,  and  West  Virginia. 


416  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

which  has  been  done  scarcely  anywhere  as  yet,  not  only 
the  state  itself  but  the  subdivisions  within  the  county  will 
suffer  from  an  inefficient  performance  of  this  funda- 
mental function  which  they  are  powerless  to  correct.47 
One  rather  popular  proposal  for  increasing  the  sources 
of  municipal  revenue  is  to  increase  the  amounts  derived 
from  the  second  largest  source  of  revenue  receipts  at 
present,  namely  the  earnings  of  public-service  enterprises, 
either  by  making  those  now  operated  by  the  cities  more 
profitable  by  means  of  higher  charges,  or  to  increase  the 
number  of  public  services  directly  operated  by  the  cities 
to  include  particularly  those  which  are  by  nature  more 
easily  adapted  to  yield  a  profit.  This  is  one  of  the  con- 
siderations that  has  prompted  English  cities  to  embark  so 
extensively  upon  programs  of  municipal  trading.  Now 
it  is  true  that  according  to  the  Census  reports  in  191 7 
the  revenue  receipts  from  the  earnings  of  public-service 
enterprises  in  cities  of  more  than  30,000  inhabitants  ex- 
ceeded the  governmental  cost  payments  for  the  expenses 
of  these  enterprises  by  some  $60,000,000,  yielding  a  net 
income  amounting  to  almost  6  per  cent  of  the  total  reve- 
nue receipts.  It  is  also  true  that  the  public-service  en- 
terprises commonly  operated  by  American  cities  are  of  a 
nature  in  which  profit  almost  necessarily  is  a  subordinate 
consideration  to  service.  From  both  of  which  considera- 
tions it  might  be  concluded  that  the  more  extensive  em- 
barkation by  cities  in  the  field  of  municipal  ownership 
and  operation  of  public  utilities  would  promise  consider- 
ably enlarged  revenues.  But  to  offset  this  conclusion  it 
must  be  remembered,  as  the  Census  Bureau  itself  clearly 
points   out,   that  the  accounting  methods  of   cities,   es- 

47  For  a  criticism  of  this  system,  of  county  assessment  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  city  see,  Blachly,  "  Municipal  Home  Rule  in 
Oklahoma,"  Southwestern  Political  Science  Quarterly,  June,  1920, 
p.  17. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      417 

pecially  as  regards  their  public  utilities,  are  unscientific  in 
the  extreme  and  that  the  statements  as  to  the  costs  of 
these  undertakings  are  subject  to  a  large  margin  of  er- 
ror on  that  account.  Opponents  of  municipal  ownership 
and  operation  have  prepared  elaborate  statistical  reports 
to  show  that  many  municipal  utilities  which  are  reported 
by  the  cities  to  be  earning  profits  are  in  reality  being  con- 
ducted at  a  financial  loss.  Unprejudiced  scientific  exam- 
inations into  this  question  are  unfortunately  rarely  avail- 
able, but  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  conclusions  as  to  the 
financially  profitable  nature  of  municipally  owned  and  op- 
erated utilities  drawn  from  the  reports  of  the  cities  them- 
selves are  too  optimistic.  Furthermore,  as  has  already 
been  suggested,  there  are  very  serious  political  questions 
raised  by  the  program  of  extensive  municipal  ownership, 
while  the  question  of  profit  in  connection  with  the  under- 
takings most  commonly  cited  as  proper  fields  of  municipal 
endeavor  must  yield  in  large  measure  to  the  social  as- 
pects involved  in  the  furnishing  of  the  service  at  cost  or 
at  slight  profit.  It  seems  fair  to  conclude,  therefore,  that 
whatever  may  be  said  for  municipal  ownership  on  other 
grounds,  it  can  hardly  be  urged  as  an  important  source 
of  additional  revenues. 

The  next  largest  source  of  revenue  receipts,  namely 
special  assessments  or  betterment  taxes,  would  seem  to 
be  capable  of  some  increase  for  a  definite  kind  of  muni- 
cipal activity,  namely  the  construction  of  improvements 
that  directly  enhance  the  value  of  adjacent  property. 
There  is,  of  course,  a  definite  limit  to  the  amount  that 
can  be  collected  in  this  way  since  the  amount  of  the  as- 
sessment may  not,  in  general,  exceed  the  resulting  increase 
in  property  values,  but  the  full  amount  realizable  from 
this  source  has  not  in  most  cases  been  reached.  In  this 
connection  American  cities  would  have  to  be  helped  by 


4i 8  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

being  accorded  the  power  of  excess  condemnation,  that  is 
the  power  of  condemning  for  a  public  use  more  property 
than  is  actually  needed  for  the  improvement  itself  and 
profiting  themselves  by  the  resultant  increases  in  adjacent 
property.  In  a  number  of  states  constitutional  amend- 
ments as  well  as  legislation  are  necessary  in  order  to 
enable  cities  to  enjoy  the  power  of  excess  condemnation 
by  legislative  grant.48  This  power  is,  however,  of 
greater  significance  as  an  aid  to  effective  city  planning  than 
as  a  source  of  additional  net  income  to  the  city,  as  even 
the  European  cities  which  have  undertaken  the  most  ex- 
tensive improvements  under  this  plan  have  frequently 
found  it  to  be  financially  unprofitable. 

Of  the  business  and  non-business  license  taxes  which 
constituted  the  next  largest  source  of  municipal  revenue 
receipts  in  1917,  liquor  licenses  constituted  the  source  of 
three-fourths  of  the  amount  so  received,  and  that  source 
of  income  has  now  been  terminated  by  Federal  prohibi- 
tion. Business  taxes,  other  than  on  the  liquor  traffic, 
were  collected  in  every  one  of  the  cities  of  more  than 
30,000  inhabitants,  in  connection  with  licenses,  but  the 
total  amount  so  collected  was  almost  negligible  as  it  con- 
stituted less  than  1  per  cent  of  the  total  revenue  receipts. 
Business  taxes  collected  without  the  issuance  of  licenses 
were  even  less  important  as  sources  of  revenue  and  were 
found  in  considerably  less  than  half  of  the  cities  included 
in  the  reports.  In  some  cities,  however,  a  very  consid- 
erable revenue  is  derived  from  this  source  49  and  it  is 
urged  that  this  source  of  taxation  could  be  made  to  yield 

48  For  a  good  discussion  of  the  legal  aspects  of  this  matter  see 
Cushman,  Excess  Condemnation  (New  York,  1917),  and  works  on 
city  planning. 

49  As  for  instance  in  St.  Louis,  Missouri,  which  in  1917  reported 
an  income  of  nearly  two  and  one-half  million  dollars  from  such 
business  taxes. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS       419 

much  more  than  it  does.  Such  business  taxes  on  under- 
takings not  requiring  licenses  for  purposes  of  regulation 
are  very  unpopular,  however,  and  are  generally  objected 
to  as  tending  to  increase  disproportionately  the  cost  of 
necessities  to  the  consumer. 

Of  the  other  sources  of  municipal  revenue  receipts 
little  need  be  said,  except  to  point  out  that  cities  are  prop- 
erly entitled  to  larger  revenues  from  state  subventions  and 
grants  for  the  performance  of  functions  in  which  the 
state  as  a  whole  has  a  vital  interest,  such  as  police,  public 
health,  education,  etc.  Such  aid  should  properly  go  hand 
in  hand  with  a  larger  measure  of  control  by  the  state  over 
the  city  in  the  performance  of  these  functions  and,  as 
has  already  been  pointed  out,  a  system  of  grants-in-aid 
combines  the  merits  of  increasing  the  now  too  limited 
resources  of  the  city  and  strengthening  the  now  too  feeble 
control  of  the  state  without  doing  violence  to  local  de- 
sire for  autonomy.  There  is  some  limited  prospect  of 
further  relief  for  cities  by  this  method. 

With  the  constantly  increasing  difficulties  experienced 
by  cities  in  securing  adequate  revenues,  the  problem  has 
become  one  of  not  merely  making  the  present  sources 
of  revenue  more  abundant  but  also  of  finding  altogether 
new  sources.  But  in  spite  of  many  investigations  and 
reports  on  this  subject  little  has  been  developed  in  the  way 
of  constructive  suggestions.  The  proposal  to  secure  for 
the  city  the  so-called  unearned  increment  in  the  increased 
value  of  real  estate  has  much  to  recommend  it  both  from 
a  financial  and  social  point  of  view  and  is  actually  applied 
to  a  certain  extent  in  European  cities.  In  this  country, 
however,  the  plan  is  still  regarded  as  savoring  too  much 
of  socialism  to  make  its  acceptance  feasible  in  the  im- 
mediate future.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  more  com- 
plete application  of  the  idea  embodied  in  the  much  dis- 


420  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

cussed  single-tax  system.50  Recently  there  is  a  tendency 
to  turn  to  the  municipal  income  tax  as  both  a  fairer  and 
more  profitable  kind  of  taxation  than  the  general  prop- 
erty tax,  but  so  far  no  city  has  been  authorized  to  adopt 
it.51 

The  Borrowing  Power  of  Municipalities. — Another 
fundamental  phase  of  municipal  finance  is  the  power  to 
incur  indebtedness.  This  power  is  now  universally  given 
to  cities  for  enumerated  municipal  purposes,  subject  to 
very  general  constitutional  restrictions  partly  as  to  ob- 
jects but  chiefly  as  to  total  amounts.  Nevertheless  the 
tremendous  increase  in  the  indebtedness  of  American 
cities  is  one  of  the  most  striking  features  of  their  de- 
velopment. The  average  per  capita  net  indebtedness,  that 
is  the  gross  indebtedness  less  the  assets  of  sinking  funds 
accumulated  for  their  amortization  amounted  in  146  of 
the  cities  of  more  than  30,000  population  in  19 17  to 
$80.75,  or  adopting  the  standard  of  five  persons  to  a 
family  to  more  than  $400  per  family.  This  was  nearly 
double  the  per  capita  net  indebtedness  of  those  same  cities 
less  than  fifteen  years  before.  The  restrictions  prompted 
by  the  war  operated  to  cut  down  new  indebtedness  during 
1918  and  1 91 9,  and  the  abnormally  high  cost  of  con- 
struction still  operates  to  reduce  the  financing  of  new  con- 

50  The  gospel  of  the  single  tax  is  propounded  in  Henry  George's 
Progress  and  Poverty,  Anniversary  edition  (New  York,  1911). 

51  Discussions  of  municipal  taxation  can  be  found  in  all  of  the 
standard  works  on  public  finance,  such  as  Bastable,  Public  Finance 
(New  York,  1903)  ;  Ely,  Taxation  in  American  States  and  Cities 
(New  York,  1910)  ;  Seligman,  Essays  in  Taxation  (New  York, 
1913)  ;  and  in  a  special  volume  of  the  Annals  of  the  American 
Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  "Taxation  in  American 
Cities,"  July,  1906.  The  Proceedings  of  the  Annual  Conferences 
of  the  National  Tax  Association  contain  many  interesting  discus- 
sions of  the  problems  of  taxation,  and  special  reports  on  taxation 
in  a  number  of  states  go  into  the  matter  of  local  taxation  as  well 
as  state  revenues. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      421 

struction  projects  requiring  bond  issues,  but  the  upward 
trend  of  municipal  indebtedness  will  undoubtedly  be  re- 
sumed again  when  financial  conditions  are  more  stable. 

Much  of  the  municipal  indebtedness  represents  the  re- 
sult of  corrupt  and  extravagant  financing  of  earlier  years. 
Much  of  it  on  the  other  hand  is  offset  by  improvements, 
which,  while  not  marketable  assets,  represent  real  values 
obtained  for  the  money  spent.  But  when  due  allowance 
is  made  for  both  of  these  facts  it  is  evident  that  the 
steadily  rising  per  capita  indebtedness  of  cities  is  a  mat- 
ter for  serious  consideration  if  ultimate  bankruptcy  is  to 
be  avoided.  On  the  other  hand  without  the  use  of  the 
borrowing  power  cities  would  be  tremendously  handi- 
capped in  providing  needed  public  works.  The  pay-as- 
you-go  policy  has  much  to  recommend  it  for  cities  as 
well  as  individuals,  but  putting  off  the  erection  of  sorely 
needed  works  until  money  has  been  accumulated  to  pay 
for  them  would  mean  hopeless  stagnation,  while  to  pay 
for  improvements  that  will  serve  for  a  generation  out  of 
current  funds  would  not  only  be  absolutely  impossible 
in  the  present  condition  of  municipal  revenue  but  would 
be  an  unfair  burden  on  the  present  generation  of  tax- 
payers. 

What  would  seem  to  be  needed  in  this  regard  is  an 
administrative  supervision  by  the  state  over  municipal 
borrowing,  such  as  exists  in  England.  Arbitrary  consti- 
tutional or  statutory  limits  are  undesirable,  for  what  may 
be  a  justifiable  undertaking  in  one  city  may  be  unwise 
in  another,  though  both  may  have  reached  the  constitu- 
tional limit.  On  the  other  hand  the  common  requirement 
of  a  local  referendum  on  proposed  bond  issues  has  not 
been  effective  in  checking  extravagance.  In  fact  the 
local  electorate,  if  confronted  with  the  alternative  of  pay- 
ing for  an  improvement  out  of  current  revenues  or  of 


422  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

distributing  its  payment  over  a  number  of  years  by  means 
of  bond  issues  is  very  likely  to  prefer  the  latter.  The 
control  over  municipal  loans  in  England,  it  is  true,  has 
not  prevented  municipal  indebtedness  from  mounting  even 
more  rapidly  in  some  cases  than  in  this  country  but  it 
at  least  has  assured  examination  of  each  proposed  under- 
taking and  an  insistence  upon  sound  handling  of  the  fi- 
nances, which  is  after  all  the  direction  in  which  American 
cities  have  been  most  lax. 

Municipal  Accounting  Methods. —  This  brings  up 
one  final  consideration  with  regard  to  municipal  finances 
and  that  is  the  matter  of  proper  accounting  and  control  of 
expenditures.  The  Census  Bureau  in  its  annual  reports 
calls  attention  to  the  unsatisfactory  nature  of  municipal 
accounting  methods  which  make  even  comparative  statis- 
tics extremely  difficult  of  compilation.  Considerable 
improvement  has  appeared  in  this  regard  in  the  larger 
cities,  partly  due  to  the  influence  of  the  Census  Bureau 
itself,  but  much  remains  to  be  done.  As  in  the  case  of 
counties  so  in  the  case  of  cities,  improved  accounting  and 
business  methods  would  enable  cities  to  accomplish  much 
more  than  they  do  with  the  resources  they  now  possess, 
and  this  would  appear  to  be  the  first  step  to  be  taken  as  a 
measure  of  relief.52 

The  Relation  of  Cities  to  Counties 

Cities,  as  has  been  seen,  are  local  government  corpora- 
tions largely  independent  of  the  counties  in  which  they 
happen  to  lie.     Originally  they  were  considered  as  gov- 

52  Among  recent  works  on  municipal  accounting  and  budgets  may 
be  mentioned,  Cleveland,  Municipal  Administration  and  Account- 
ing (New  York,  1909)  ;  Eggleston,  Municipal  Accounting  (New 
York,  1914)  ;  and  the  volume  of  the  Annals  of  the  American  Acad- 
emy of  Political  and  Social  Science  on  "  Public  Budgets,"  Novem- 
ber, 1915,  Parts  III  and  IV. 


CITY  GOVERNMENT:  FUNCTIONS      423 

ernmental  bodies  for  the  performance  of  quite  a  distinct 
body  of  functions.  But  as  has  been  made  clear  from  the 
discussion  of  county  and  city  functions,  the  activities  of 
the  two  kinds  of  local  government  units  tend  to  approxi- 
mate each  other  more  and  more,  so  that  in  certain  direc- 
tions there  is  a  direct  duplication  of  functions.  This  is 
true  for  instance  of  the  enforcement  of  the  penal  laws 
of  the  state,  the  sheriff  and  the  mayor  both  being  charged 
with  the  duty  of  state  law  enforcement  within  the  city. 
There  is  here  no  coordination,  and  the  possibility  of  con- 
flicts of  powers,  or,  what  is  even  worse,  shifting  of  re- 
sponsibility is  not  only  present  but  in  some  cases  has 
made  itself  strikingly  real.  The  same  condition  exists 
with  reference  to  poor  relief.  In  other  cases,  as  in  the 
double  performance  of  such  functions  as  tax  assessment 
and  collection,  there  is  expensive  duplication  of  activities, 
a  situation  which,  as  has  been  seen,  cannot  be  said  to 
have  been  satisfactorily  solved  by  entrusting  the  function 
solely  to  the  county  authorities. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  city  being  part  of  the  county 
for  purposes  of  revenue,  and  comprising  in  many  cases 
much  the  greatest  part  of  the  taxable  values,  is  taxed 
not  only  for  the  necessary  city  functions  to  which  the 
county  contributes  nothing,  but  also  pays  the  lion's  share 
of  the  expenses  of  the  county  government,  much  the 
largest  part  of  which  are  used  for  activities  in  which  the 
inhabitants  of  the  city  have  no  direct  concern.  Further- 
more under  the  small  commissioner  type  of  board,  whether 
elected  at  large  or  by  districts,  the  city  as  such  has  no 
representatives  and  where  there  is  the  supervisor  system 
the  city  is  frequently  inadequately  represented  as  against 
the  rural  sections  of  the  county. 

There  is  an  obvious  need  of  readjustment,  therefore, 
in  the  relations  between  city  and  county  in  order  to  avoid 


424  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

useless  duplication  of  functions,  diffused  responsibility, 
and  unjust  taxation  of  city  dwellers  for  activities  that 
are  of  no  benefit  to  them.  In  England  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, boroughs  or  cities  with  more  than  50,000  inhabi- 
tants are  taken  out  of  the  administrative  counties  and 
constituted  county  boroughs.  In  Prussia  a  similar  dis- 
position was  made  in  the  case  of  cities  of  more  than 
25,000  inhabitants.53  A  similar  device  would  seem  to 
be  demanded  in  the  American  system  of  local  government. 
Some  steps  have  been  taken  in  this  country  in  that  di- 
rection in  the  case  of  a  few  of  the  larger  cities,  and  there 
is  a  movement  afoot  for  its  extension  to  other  large  cities 
as  will  appear  in  the  next  chapter.  But  it  may  be  asked 
whether  the  proposal  to  take  cities  out  of  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  counties  should  not  be  extended  to  all  cities  large 
enough  to  present  definite  local  interests  of  their  own 
so  distinct  from  the  concerns  of  the  county  that  they 
should  be  divorced.  It  is  not  possible  to  state  at  just 
what  stage  of  municipal  development  that  begins  to  be 
the  case,  but  it  would  certainly  seem  to  apply  to  cities  of 
twenty  or  twenty-five  thousand.  In  Virginia  at  present 
all  cities,  and  that  means  all  incorporated  places  of  more 
than  5,000  inhabitants,  are  separated  from  the  counties 
in  which  they  lie  for  administrative  purposes.  This  is 
probably  carrying  the  process  too  far,  but  the  more  gen- 
eral application  of  the  principle  involved  in  this  separa- 
tion would  seem  to  be  a  possible  line  of  future  develop- 
ment that  should  be  seriously  considered.54 

53  See  James,  Principles  of  Prussian  Administration  (New  York, 
1913),  PP-  no  ff. 

54  See  Chaps,  viii  and  ix. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

DEVELOPMENTS  AND  TENDENCIES  OF  THE 
PAST  DECADE i 

In  some  respects  the  last  decade  may  be  said  to  have 
ushered  in  a  new  era  in  local  government,  for  while  much 
of  the  progress  made  in  this  period  has  been  simply  the 
logical  extension  of  movements  begun  in  preceding  years, 
much  of  it  is  along  such  new  lines  that  it  may  be  regarded 
as  largely  the  product  of  a  new  point  of  view  developed 
in  the  past  ten  years.  Most  of  these  newer  developments 
have  been  touched  upon  in  the  text  of  the  earlier  chap- 
ters, though  in  the  general  descriptive  presentation  of  the 
system  of  local  government  as  it  is,  it  did  not  seem  expedi- 
ent to  devote  much  space  to  the  discussion  of  develop- 
ments that  are  still  so  isolated  or  limited  in  their  appli- 
cation as  to  constitute  exceptions  to  the  general  rule. 
But  numerically  insignificant  as  many  of  these  develop- 
ments may  seem  as  individual  phenomena,  no  discussion 
of  local  government  in  the  United  States  would  be  com- 
plete which  did  not  devote  special  attention  to  them, 
warranted  by  their  importance  as  evidencing  tendencies 
which  seem  destined  to  have  a  profound  effect  in  shap- 
ing the  developments  of  the  next  ten  years.     The  more 

1  The  most  valuable  record  of  recent  developments  in  the  field 
of  local  government  in  the  United  States  is  to  be  found  in  the 
annual  volumes  of  the  American  Year  Book  beginning  with  a  brief 
summary  of  conditions  and  the  record  of  events  for  the  year  1910. 
More  extended  discussions  of  new  developments  and  new  tenden- 
cies are  to  be  found  in  the  volumes  of  the  National  Municipal  Re- 
view from  1912  to  the  present  and  of  the  American  City,  1909  to 
the  present. 

425 


A 26  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

interesting  and  significant  of  these  newer  developments 
therefore,  will  be  briefly  reviewed  here  under  the  heads 
of  county  and  city  government,  respectively. 

New  Developments  in  County  Government 

Home  Rule. —  California  in  191 1  took  a  new  and 
radical  step  in  the  direction  of  solving  the  county  govern- 
ment problem,  by  adopting  an  amendment  to  the  state 
constitution  which  permitted  any  county  to  frame  a  char- 
ter for  its  own  government  by  a  board  of  fifteen  free- 
holders to  be  chosen  by  the  qualified  electors  of  the  county. 
The  initiative  for  such  action  could  come  either  from 
the  board  of  county  supervisors  or  from  the  electors  by 
petition.  The  charter  framed  by  the  board  of  freehold- 
ers, if  accepted  by  popular  vote  of  the  county  electors, 
must  be  submitted  to  the  legislature  for  approval  or  re- 
jection as  a  whole,  without  power  of  alteration  or  amend- 
ment. This  was  simply  applying  to  counties  the  same 
principles  of  home-rule  charter  framing  which  had  been 
extended  to  cities  in  California  nearly  twenty  years  be- 
fore.2 The  county  home-rule  amendment,  however, 
specified  that  there  should  be  at  least  three  supervisors 
elected  by  popular  vote,  and  required  a  long  list  of  county 
officers  3  in  each  county.  But  the  amendment  expressly 
provided  that  these  officers  could  either  be  elected  or  ap- 
pointed in  such  manner  and  for  such  terms  and  at  such 
compensation  as  the  charter  might  provide.  Such  char- 
ters could  provide  for  the  powers  and  duties  of  boards 

2  The  first  home-rule  city  charter  amendment,  in  1879,  applied 
only  to  cities  of  more  than  100,000  population,  San  Francisco  being 
the  only  city  in  that  class.  In  1892  the  privilege  was  extended  to 
cities  of  more  than  3.500  inhabitants. 

3  Sheriffs,  county  clerks,  treasurers,  recorders,  license  collectors, 
tax  collectors,  public  administrators,  coroners,  surveyors,  district  at- 
torneys, auditors,  assessors,  and  superintendents  of  schools.  These 
are  chiefly  officers  charged  with  duties  of  state  administration. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  427 

of  supervisors  and  all  county  officers,  provided  that  such 
provisions  should  be  subject  to  and  controlled  by  general 
laws;  and  under  another  provision  of  the  constitution, 
counties  were  empowered  to  make  and  enforce  within 
their  limits  all  such  local  police,  sanitary,  and  other  regu- 
lations as  were  not  in  conflict  with  general  laws.4  Coun- 
ties seem  to  be  accorded  as  full  a  measure  of  freedom 
from  legislative  control  as  are  cities  under  the  home- 
rule  provision  applicable  to  them,  for  the  constitution 
expressly  states  that  whenever  any  county  has  adopted 
a  charter  and  it  has  been  approved  by  the  legislature,  the 
general  laws  of  the  legislature  required  for  the  govern- 
ment of  counties  by  Sections  4  and  5  of  Art.  XI.  shall 
be  superseded  as  to  such  county  by  the  charter,  so  far  as 
conflicting  provisions  are  found  in  the  county  charter. 
So  far  four  California  counties  have  framed  and 
adopted  their  own  charters  under  the  constitu- 
tional authority  so  granted.  The  first  county  to  take 
action  was  Los  Angeles  County  and  the  new  county  char- 
ter which  was  adopted  on  November  7,  19 12,  went  into 
effect  in  June,  19 13.  Among  the  more  significant  pro- 
visions of  this  new  charter  are  the  following:  Auditor, 
coroner,  clerk,  public  administrator,  recorder,  surveyor, 
tax  collector,  and  treasurer  are  made  appointive  by  the 
supervisors  instead  of  elective  as  under  the  state  law. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  constables  who  are  made  ap- 
pointive by  the  sheriff  under  the  charter.  The  civil- 
service  eligible  lists  are  made  the  basis  of  selection 
for  all  of  these  offices.  Only  the  five  supervisors,  one  in 
each  district,  the  sheriff,  the  district  attorney,  the  as- 
sessor, and  the  justices  of  the  peace  are  elective.  The 
fee  system  is  abolished  and  a  comprehensive  civil-ser,vice 
merit  system  is  provided  for.5 

4  Constitution  of  California,  Art.  XI,  Sec.  u. 

5  For  the  text  of  the  Los  Angeles  charter  see  Gilbertson,  The 


428  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  only  state  that  has  followed  the  example  of  Cali- 
fornia so  far  in  the  granting  of  home-rule  charter  privi- 
leges to  counties  is  Maryland,  which,  by  an  amendment 
adopted  in  19 15,  granted  to  counties  the  right  to  frame  and 
adopt  their  own  charters  by  a  process  similar  to  that  de- 
scribed as  in  effect  in  California,  save  that  no  legislative 
approval  is  necessary.  The  legislature  was  instructed  to 
provide  a  grant  of  express  powers  for  such  counties  as 
might  adopt  charters  under  that  provision,  and  such 
charters  were  to  repeal  any  local  laws  inconsistent  there- 
with. But  the  charter  provisions  are  made  subordinate 
to  public  general  laws  of  the  state;  the  measure  of  in- 
dependence granted  to  the  county  being,  therefore,  less 
than  in  California,  though  the  supplementary  law  of 
1918  in  execution  of  the  amendment  grants  broad  local 
powers. 

Baltimore  County,  which  does  not  include  the  city  of 
Baltimore,  was  the  first  county  to  take  action  under  the 
constitutional  amendment,  and  its  action  is  no  less  signi- 
ficant than  that  of  Los  Angeles  County  seven  years  be- 
fore. In  May,  1920,  the  charter  commission  elected 
to  draft  a  charter  under  the  new  constitutional  and  legal 
provisions  reported  a  charter  for  consideration  by  the 
voters  in  the  November  election.  This  charter,  which, 
however,  was  defeated  in  the  November  election,  adopted 
the  commission-manager  idea  as  its  fundamental  basis, 
the  first  instance  in  which  such  a  proposal  was  definitely 
submitted  for  adoption  by  a  county.  As  in  California 
there  are  a  number  of  offices  which  cannot  be  abolished 
by  home-rule  charters.6     But  in  Maryland  they  are  elec- 

County,  Appendix  B,  pp.  219  ft.  For  a  discussion  of  the  same  see 
ibid.,  pp.  172-173;  and  Annals,  etc.,  May,  1913,  pp.  229-236.  A  brief 
note  may  be  found  in  the  American  Year  Book  for  1912,  p.  190. 

6  Judges,  sheriff,  states  attorney,  clerk  of  courts,  register  of  wills, 
justices,  constables,  coroners,  surveyor,  and  treasurer. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  429 

tive  by  constitutional  provision  and  cannot  be  made  ap- 
pointive by  the  charter  as  was  done  in  California.  Fur- 
thermore, education  is  under  an  independent  board  of 
commissioners.  The  proposed  charter  provided  for  a 
county  council  of  fifteen  members  who  should  choose  a 
county  manager  as  chief  executive  officer.  The  latter 
should  nominate  three  department  heads  for  appointment 
by  the  council.  The  charter  was  far  from  being  an  or- 
thodox commission-manager  charter,  but  was  a  long  step 
in  that  direction  and  away  from  the  old  diffused  sys- 
tem.7 Although  not  finally  adopted  it  marked  an  im- 
portant step  in  the  movement  to  apply  to  county  govern- 
ment the  principles  which  have  been  widely  accepted  as 
instruments  of  progress  in  the  organization  of  city  gov- 
ernment. This  plan  which  has  the  approval  of  the  Na- 
tional Short  Ballot  Organization  and  of  a  number  of 
authorities  on  county  affairs  back  of  it,  will  no  doubt 
receive  more  and  more  consideration  as  increasing  at- 
tention is  devoted  to  the  study  of  the  county  problem.8 
The  movement  for  county  home  rule,  in  spite  of  its 
modest  beginning,  may  be  said  to  be  fairly  launched, 
therefore,  and  the  spread  of  the  idea  may  reasonably 
be  expected  to  follow.9  It  may  be  proper,  therefore,  to 
raise  the  question  at  this  point  whether  the  principles  of 
home  rule  apply  equally  to  counties  and  cities.  Inas- 
much as  the  whole  case  for  home  rule,  so-called,  rests 

7  See  H.  W.  Dodds,  "  A  County-Manager  Charter  in  Maryland," 
National  Municipal  Review,  August,  1920,  Vol.  IX,  No.  8,  p.  504. 

8  See  the  text  of  a  bill  introduced  in  the  New  York  legislature 
in  1916  at  the  instance  of  the  County  Government  Association  of 
New  York  State,  in  Gilbertson,  The  County,  Appendix  D,  pp.  251- 
256. 

9  See  text  of  constitutional  amendment  introduced  in  the  legis- 
lature of  New  York  in  1916  proposing  optional  county  laws,  in  Gil- 
bertson, ibid.,  Appendix  C,  pp.  247-250.  In  Ohio  also  such  an 
amendment  has  been  introduced. 


430  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

on  the  fundamental  assumption  that  there  are  some  mat- 
ters which  the  people  of  a  locality  have  a  special  interest 
in  and  which  they  should  be  allowed  to  regulate  for  them- 
selves without  interference  by  the  legislature,  the  first 
question  to  consider  is  whether  county  affairs  may  be 
considered  as  coming  within  the  category  of  such  mat- 
ters. It  must  be  reiterated,  in  this  connection,  that  the 
original  conception  of  county  government  in  this  coun- 
try did  not  embrace  the  idea  of  there  being  local  inter- 
ests of  the  county  as  such,  but  that  the  county  was  merely 
a  convenient  area  for  the  administration  of  matters  of 
state  concern.  Had  that  original  idea  been  adhered  to 
there  would  obviously  have  been  no  basis  for  the  asser- 
tion of  a  right  of  home  rule  or  local  freedom  in  the  con- 
duct of  governmental  affairs  of  the  county.  But  the 
spread  of  democratic  ideas  led,  as  has  been  noted,  already 
in  the  colonial  period  to  the  election  of  county  officers  by 
the  county  electors,  in  place  of  their  selection  by  the  state 
authorities.  We  find,  therefore,  in  this  country  very 
early  in  the  development  of  local  government  the  origin 
and  spread  of  the  idea  that  the  right  of  selection  of 
county  officers  is  properly  a  county  matter,  and  this  as 
has  been  pointed  out  crystallized  very  generally  into  con- 
stitutional provisions  insuring  this  local  selection. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that  the  right  of  local  selec- 
tion of  officers  developed  without  reference  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  duties  these  officers  had  to  perform,  as  the 
original  functions  of  the  county  in  the  fields  of  judicial 
administration,  finances,  highways,  and  poor  relief,  were 
still  regarded  as  state  rather  than  local  concerns.  Hence 
grew  up  the  anomalous  situation  of  the  local  control  of 
officers  who  were  in  theory  supposed  to  be  state  officers. 
It  is  very  doubtful,  therefore,  whether  the  local  control 
over  county  officers  could  be  regarded  as  a  legitimate 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  431 

and  proper  application  to  counties  of  the  identical  princi- 
ple with  regard  to  cities,  since  the  latter  were  from  the 
first  created  distinctly  for  the  satisfaction  of  local  as 
distinguished  from  general  needs. 

If  it  is  intended  to  go  still  further  in  applying  the 
analogy  of  cities  by  giving  counties  the  right  to  deter- 
mine their  own  framework  of  government  and  to  exer- 
cise powers  free  from  legislative  control,  such  a  proposal 
can  be  considered  sound  only  so  far  as  the  county  may 
be  said  to  be  engaged  in  functions  essentially  like  those 
performed  by  cities.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  as  has  al- 
ready been  remarked,  counties  have  tended  to  approach 
more  and  more  the  position  occupied  by  cities  as  regards 
their  functions.  In  a  growing  number  of  states  counties 
are  accorded  by  constitution  or  by  law  a  local  ordinance 
power  over  matters  of  public  health,  safety,  and  morals, 
the  local  police  power  in  the  broad  sense.  In  some  cases 
also  they  are  given  authority  to  grant  franchises  to  public- 
service  corporations.  In  the  field  of  public  works, 
chiefly  bridges,  roads,  and  county  buildings,  but  includ- 
ing also  other  undertakings,  comprised  under  the  general 
designation  of  public-service  enterprises,  counties  are 
developing  an  ever  increasing  activity,  while  education 
has  been  seen  to  be  a  function  of  county  administration 
to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in  all  but  the  New  England 
states.  As  far  as  the  range  of  activities  is  concerned, 
therefore,  it  would  seem  that  counties  are  following  more 
and  more  in  the  footsteps  of  cities,  though  of  course  the 
extent  of  activities  within  each  class  is  much  less  than 
that  developed  in  the  municipalities. 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  under  present  conditions 
and  especially  in  view  of  manifest  tendencies,  the  plea 
for  home  rule  for  counties  would  stand,  in  a  number  of 
states  at  least,  on  the  same  ground  as  the  home-rule  plea 


432  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

for  cities.  Two  factors  must  not  be  overlooked,  how- 
ever, which  differentiate  counties  from  cities  in  this  re- 
gard. In  the  first  place  counties  are  still  chiefly  occupied 
with  matters  of  state  concern,  particularly  in  police,  elec- 
tions, judicial,  and  finance  administration.  Therefore 
both  the  form  of  organization  and  the  powers  of  the  of- 
ficers are  of  more  moment  to  the  state  than  is  the  case 
in  the  cities.  In  the  second  place,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  typical  American  county  is  an  area  of  large  ex- 
tent and  small  population.  Cities  are  characterized  by 
congestion  of  population  and  city  problems  are  similar 
in  kind,  though  differing  in  degree,  in  the  largest  and  the 
smallest  cities.  Consequently  we  find  the  home-rule 
charter  privilege  extended  in  a  number  of  states  to  all 
cities,  whatever  their  size,  or  at  least  to  all  communities 
which  are  large  enough  to  manifest  urban  conditions. 
Even  a  city  of  ten  thousand  inhabitants  may  be  said  to 
have  its  own  peculiar  problems  which  can  best  be  solved 
by  local  initiative.  But  a  county  of  ten  thousand  inhabi- 
tants spread  over  an  area  of  five  hundred  square  miles, 
and  there  are  hundreds  of  such  counties  scattered  through- 
out the  United  States,  represents  quite  a  different  govern- 
mental problem.  Local  needs  are  relatively  less  press- 
ing and  relatively  much  more  expensive  to  satisfy.  Con- 
sequently state  interests  overshadow  local  interests  and 
local  autonomy  is  less  important  than  central  aid  and 
supervision.  Therefore  the  grant  of  home-rule  charter 
privileges  might  well  be  made  dependent  in  the  case  of 
counties  upon  the  attainment  of  a  certain  minimum  pop- 
ulation, a  minimum  density  of  population,  and  a  mini- 
mum assessed  valuation. 

It  may  indeed  be  questioned  whether  the  optional 
charter  plan  is  not  preferable  in  the  case  of  counties  to 
the  complete  home-rule  charter  plan.     As   long  as  the 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  433 

county  plays  such  an  important  part  in  the  judicial  sys- 
tem of  the  state  any  scheme  of  county  government  must 
make  proper  provision  for  the  performance  of  those 
functions  and  the  legislature  could  easily  combine  the 
necessary  provisions  in  these  regards  with  a  liberal  vari- 
ety of  forms  of  machinery  for  the  performance  of  local 
functions. 

Finally  it  must  be  pointed  out  that  far  reaching  im- 
provements in  the  machinery  of  county  government  can- 
not be  hoped  for  by  means  of  the  county  home-rule  char- 
ter road,  any  more  than  by  any  other  road,  unless  and 
until  the  complicated  machinery  imposed  by  constitu- 
tional provisions  on  existing  counties  is  modified. 
Neither  California  nor  Maryland,  as  has  been  noted,  re- 
lieved the  counties  of  the  necessity  of  electing  such  of- 
ficers as  sheriff,  coroner,  recorder,  clerk,  district  attorneys, 
and  other  officers  charged  with  the  performance  of  state 
functions.  Until  the  rather  feeble  political  energy  of 
the  county  electorate,  which  is  now  concerned  chiefly 
with  the  selection  of  these  officers,  can  be  concentrated 
on  the  matter  of  choosing  officers  who  deal  with  matters 
of  distinctly  county  concern,  it  may  be  questioned  whether 
a  larger  measure  of  home-rule  for  counties  would  not 
mean  an  even  larger  measure  of  misrule  in  that  large 
proportion  of  counties  where  local  matters  are  of  rela- 
tively slight  importance.  On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be 
predicted,  judging  from  the  experience  of  cities,  that 
the  very  grant  of  home-rule  privileges  would  stir  the 
now  latent  interest  of  county  electors  to  its  first  real  ac- 
tivity. It  is  possible  that  active,  wide-spread  interest 
in  the  problem  of  county  reform  in  this  country  can  be 
hoped  for  only  as  the  result  of  striking  innovations  un- 
dertaken by  individual  counties  under  home-rule  charter 
powers.     Experiments  can  be  tried  by  individual  coun- 


434  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ties  or  cities  under  snch  powers  which  the  legislature  of 
any  state  would  hesitate  to  apply  to  all  counties  or  cities 
in  the  state.  Much  may  be  said,  therefore,  in  favor  of 
county  home-rule  as  a  means  of  stimulating  interest  in 
and  study  of  the  county  problem,  irrespective  of  any  im- 
provement resulting  immediately  from  the  adoption  of 
this  plan. 

State  Control. —  While  the  county  home-rule  move- 
ment is  a  product  of  the  last  decade  in  the  direction  of 
giving  counties  larger  powers  and  greater  freedom  in 
certain  respects,  there  has  been  going  on  at  the  same  time 
a  further  strengthening  of  state  control  over  counties  in 
other  respects.  This  development,  which,  it  will  be  re- 
membered, began  in  the  latter  half  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, has  made  itself  particularly  felt  in  the  last  decade 
in  the  field  of  public  finance.  The  creation  of  new  state 
tax  commissions  and  boards  of  equalization  with  larger 
powers  over  local  assessment  has  marked  an  advance  in 
a  number  of  states,10  while  other  states  have  increased 
the  powers  of  existing  boards,  substituting  in  some  cases 
a  single  commissioner  for  the  earlier  board.  In  Indiana 
the  state  commission  is  now  given  power  of  removal  over 
local  assessors.  In  Alabama  and  North  Dakota  county 
supervisors  of  assessments  are  provided  for,  and  several 
states,11  have  recently  authorized  the  employment  of  ex- 
perts. The  movement  for  uniform  public  accounts  has 
made  substantial  progress  in  the  last  decade  and  county 
accounts  are  now  subject  to  some  state  supervision  in 
the  majority  of  states,  and  several  states  have  recently 
followed  the  lead  of  Ohio,  New  York,  and  Indiana  in 
requiring  uniform  financial  reports  from  all  local  dis- 
tricts. 

10  As  in  Alabama,  Utah,  and  North  Dakota. 

11  Among  them  Arizona,  New  York,  and  Washington. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  435 

Interesting  developments  have  occurred  also  in  other 
fields  of  state  control.  The  powers  of  the  state  educa- 
tion authorities  over  local  districts  have  been  enlarged 
materially  by  legislation  of  the  last  ten  years,  particularly 
in  those  states  which  have  adopted  a  reorganization  of 
their  state  administrative  system.  In  Idaho,  one  of  the 
states  to  undertake  extensive  administrative  reorganiza- 
tion, the  creation  of  a  state  department  of  law  enforcement 
with  the  power  to  enforce  all  the  penal  and  regulatory  laws 
of  the  state  in  the  same  manner  and  with  like  authority  as 
the  sheriffs  of  counties  marks  a  distinct  step  in  advance 
of  the  control  over  law  enforcement  by  the  local  areas. 
In  public-health  administration,  likewise,  the  last  ten 
years  have  seen  a  marked  increase  of  central  control  in  a 
number  of  states  over  local  health  officers.  This  ten- 
dency has  been  aided  by  the  emphasis  placed  by  the  Fed- 
eral Government  upon  public-health  conditions  in  com- 
munities adjacent  to  the  military  training  camps  during 
the  war. 

In  general  it  may  be  said  that  the  movement  for  the 
reorganization  of  state  administration  which  has  shown 
such  marked  vigor  in  the  last  few  years  almost  inevitably 
carries  with  it  as  a  consequence  of  improvement  in  state 
administrative  methods  the  probability  of  ever  larger  su- 
pervision and  control  over  local  areas.  It  is  true  that  so 
far  no  plan  of  state  reorganization  has  gone  to  the  length 
of  creating  a  special  department  of  local  government,  on 
the  model  of  the  former  English  Local  Government 
Board,  for  the  general  supervision  of  subordinate  areas. 
But  it  is  not  impossible  that  such  a  development  will  fol- 
low. It  will  be  recalled  that  one  of  the  criticisms  di- 
rected against  the  English  system  of  central  administra- 
tion control  was  that  such  control  was  exercised  over  lo- 
cal areas  by  no  less  than  five  distinct  departments.     The 


436  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

creation  of  the  New  Ministry  of  Public  Health  in  1919 
seems  to  point  to  a  still  further  diffusion  of  functions 
of  control  in  England  as  the  control  over  poor  relief 
and  over  finances  is  not  to  remain  with  this  successor  to 
the  Local  Government  Board.  There  are  no  doubt  ser- 
ious difficulties  in  the  way  of  centralizing  all  powers 
of  control  in  a  single  board,  commission,  or  officer,  as  is 
done  to  a  certain  extent  in  continental  Europe,  since  lo- 
cal areas  engage  in  a  number  of  different  activities,  each 
of  which,  so  far  as  it  is  a  matter  of  state  concern  also, 
is  entrusted  to  a  separate  administrative  department. 
But  there  are  many  phases  of  state  control  over  localities 
that  could  advantageously  be  combined  in  the  hands  of 
a  single  authority  under  the  direction  of  the  governor  of 
the  state,  and  this  would  seem  to  be  a  logical  develop- 
ment to  expect  from  the  progress  of  state  administrative 
reform. 

New  Activities. —  Of  considerable  significance  is  the 
enlargement  of  the  field  of  action  of  counties  within  the 
last  ten  years.  Attention  has  already  been  directed  to  this 
point,  but  it  may  be  repeated  here  that  these  new  activi- 
ties are  of  considerable  social  significance,  that  is  they  are 
positive  welfare  undertakings.  County  parks,  county 
war  memorials  and  community  houses,  county  libraries, 
and  mothers'  pensions,  are  all  illustrations  of  the  ten- 
dency to  humanize  county  government.  In  191 2  nine 
states  authorized  counties  to  employ  farm  experts  for 
advisory  and  demonstration  work,  and  a  few  years  later 
the  work  was  enormously  extended  as  a  result  of  the 
funds  available  from  the  Federal  Government  under  the 
Smith-Lever  Act.  It  need  scarcely  be  repeated  that  fur- 
ther development  along  the  lines  of  social  and  economic 
welfare  work  by  counties  will  only  be  possible  in  connec- 
tion with  state  or  Federal  aid  to  counties.     But  such  un- 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  437 

dertakings  are  serving  in  many  instances  to  bring  for 
the  first  time  the  county  into  relation  with  the  vital  inter- 
ests of  its  inhabitants.  Finally  may  be  mentioned  the 
tendency  to  transfer  to  counties  in  some  parts  of  the 
country  functions  that  had  formerly  been  left  to  the  rural 
subdivisions,  but  which  the  more  complex  conditions  of 
modern  life  make  it  inadvisable  to  leave  to  these  feebler 
units. 

County  and  City  Consolidation. —  The  last  ten  years 
have  seen  a  marked  interest  in  the  movement  for  read- 
justment in  the  relations  of  large  cities  and  the  counties 
in  which  they  lie.  The  situation  in  a  score  or  more  of 
the  largest  cities  in  the  country  in  this  respect  is  full  of 
interest. 

In  New  York  City  the  situation  is  unique  in  that  there 
are  five  counties  within  the  limits  of  the  city.  The  fiscal 
functions  of  these  counties  have  been  largely  transferred 
to  the  city  government,  but  the  counties  remain  for  judi- 
cial purposes  with  their  own  elective  officers.  In  191 8 
the  functions  of  the  coroners  were  transferred  to  the 
medical  examiner  appointed  by  the  mayor.  The  recent 
proposals  to  the  legislature  and  in  the  constitutional  con- 
vention to  abolish  the  counties  altogether  and  to  transfer 
their  judicial  functions  to  officers  under  city  control 
seem  to  embody  the  obvious  solution  to  the  problem  of 
duplication  and  diffusion  of  powers.12 

Chicago  presents  an  excellent  instance  of  wastefulness 
and  confusion  in  local  government  in  which  the  only  solu- 
tion seems  simplification  by  consolidation.  As  has  al- 
ready been  pointed  out  there  are  operating  in  Chicago 
no  less  than  thirty-eight  distinct  local  governments. 
These  comprise  the  County  of  Cook ;  the  Forest  Preserve 

12  See  Bruere  and  Wallstein,  Study  of  County  Government  within 
the  City  of  New  York,  191 5. 


438  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

District,  identical  in  area  with  the  county;  the  Sanitary 
District  of  Chicago;  the  City  of  Chicago;  fourteen 
Towns;  seventeen  Park  Districts;  a  Library  Board;  the 
School  District;  and  the  Municipal  Tuberculosis  Sani- 
tarium Board.  In  Cook  County  outside  of  Chicago,  there 
are  no  less  than  355  local  governments,  half  of  which  are 
school  districts,  69  villages,  24  towns,  8  cities,  1 1  park  dis- 
tricts, 2.7  drainage  districts,  16  high-school  districts,  and 
29  library  boards.  The  area  of  Chicago  is  200  square 
miles,  that  of  Cook  County  993  square  miles.  The  popu- 
lation of  Chicago  in  1910  constituted  more  than  ninety 
per  cent  of  the  population  of  the  county,  and  the  assessed 
valuation  of  the  city  was  92  per  cent  of  the  total  assessed 
valuation  of  the  county.  There  are  79  elective  officers 
for  Cook  County  and  within  the  City  of  Chicago  there 
are  417  officials  chosen  by  popular  election.  A  more 
striking  example  of  complexity  could  hardly  be  imagined. 
A  movement  for  unification  originated  as  early  as  the 
constitutional  convention  of  1870  when  a  provision  per- 
mitting cities  of  more  than  200,000  people  to  be  organ- 
ized as  separate  counties  was  at  one  time  agreed  to  but 
later  stricken  out.  In  1904  a  constitutional  amendment 
was  adopted  authorizing  special  legislation  for  Chicago 
subject  to  a  local  referendum  and  the  consolidation  of  local 
governments  entirely  within  the  city,  but  not  for  consoli- 
dation of  the  county  or  outside  areas  with  the  city. 
Two  legislative  proposals  providing  for  unification  within 
the  city  have  been  defeated  on  referendum.  But  recently 
more  thorough  proposals  for  unification  have  been  made. 
Among  these  is  the  proposal  to  constitute  the  City  of 
Chicago  a  city  and  county  for  itself.  This  plan  does 
not  provide,  however,  for  the  union  of  the  suburban  areas 
which  properly  belong  to  the  metropolitan  area.  It  has 
been  estimated   that   local   government  consolidation   in 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  439 

Chicago  would  save  more  than  $3,000,000  a  year  now 
wasted  in  useless  duplication.13 

In  Philadelphia  the  city  and  county  have  been  coter- 
minous since  1854  when  a  consolidation  act  was  passed 
enlarging  the  city  limits  so  as  to  include  the  county,  ab- 
sorbing nine  incorporated  districts,  six  boroughs  and 
thirteen  townships.  A  number  of  county  officers  were 
discontinued,  namely  the  county  commissioners,  the  treas- 
urer, and  auditor,  their  functions  being  tranf erred  to 
city  officials,  but  the  identity  of  the  county  was  preserved 
and  a  number  of  elective  county  officers  were  retained, 
including  the  judges,  register,  recorder,  clerk,  district 
attorney,  and  coroner.  In  spite  of  frequent  changes  in 
the  Philadelphia  charter,  including  a  radical  revision  in 
1 9 19,  the  courts  and  county  officers  have  been  retained 
and  include  judges,  district  attorney,  sheriff,  prothono- 
tary,  register  and  clerk  of  the  orphans'  court,  recorder, 
clerk  of  the  quarter  sessions,  treasurer,  controller,  re- 
ceiver of  taxes,  coroner,  and  solicitor.  The  desirability 
of  merging  city  and  county  officers  and  functions  com- 
pletely in  Philadelphia  has  been  recognized  and  proposals 
therefor  advocated  within  the  last  year,  to  be  presented 
to   the    Governors   Commission   on   the    Constitution.14 

Detroit,  now  the  fourth  city  in  the  United  States,  pre- 
sents another  case  in  point  for  consolidation.  Here  the 
city  covers  an  area  of  only  47  square  miles  out  of  a  total 
of  620  square  miles  in  Wayne  County.  But  the  popula- 
tion of  the  city  in   19 10  was  almost  nine-tenths  of  the 

13  For  an  excellent  discussion  of  the  problem  of  local  govern- 
ment in  Chicago  and  Cook  County  see  Bulletin  No.  n  prepared 
by  the  Illinois  Legislative  Reference  Bureau  for  the  Constitutional 
Convention  of  1920.  The  pamphlets  of  the  Chicago  Bureau  of  Pub- 
lic Efficiency  in  the  last  ten  years  have  clearly  set  forth  the  evils 
of  the  present  complex  system  and  the  need  for  consolidation. 

14  See  Bulletin  No.  II,  Illinois  Constitutional  Convention,  p.  962. 


440  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

total  population  of  the  county,  and  the  enormous  increase 
of  the  city's  population  in  the  last  decade,  has  made  the 
proportion  even  larger.  The  Michigan  constitution  of 
1850  had  authorized  the  legislature  to  organize  any  city 
of  more  than  20,000  inhabitants  into  a  separate  county, 
subject  to  approval  by  tire  voters  of  the  county.  In 
1908  this  provision  was  amended  to  apply  to  cities  of 
over  100,000  only,  but  the  constitution  did  not  permit  the 
abolition  of  the  elective  county  officers  of  sheriffs,  clerk, 
treasurer,  register  of  deeds,  prosecuting  attorney,  etc., 
nor  make  any  provision  for  the  union  of  city  and  county 
offices.  Although  the  same  duplication  and  conflict  of 
political  forces  exist  in  Wayne  County  and  Detroit  as  in 
other  metropolitan  centers,  there  has  apparently  been 
no  organized  movement  for  putting  into  execution  the 
legislative  authority  to  organize  the  city  as  a  county. 

In  Cleveland,  Ohio,  on  the  other  hand,  there  has  been 
of  recent  years  a  determined  effort  waged  by  the  Civic 
League  to  secure  a  constitutional  amendment  permitting 
consolidation  of  city  and  county  government  there.  The 
area  of  Cleveland  is  something  over  50  square  miles,  as 
compared  with  an  area  of  463  square  miles  for  the  whole 
of  Cuyahoga  County,  while  the  population  of  the  city 
in  1910  constituted  very  nearly  nine-tenths  of  the  popula- 
tion of  the  county.  Constitutional  amendments  permit- 
ting city  and  county  consolidation  were  introduced  into 
the  legislature  in  191 7  and  again  19 19  but  failed  of  adop- 
tion, largely  on  political  grounds.15  The  advantages  of 
consolidation  for  Cleveland  have  been  clearly  set  forth 
in  the  pamphlets  of  the  Cleveland  Civic  League.  In 
Cuyahoga  County  there  are  93  political  units  electing 
more  than  800  public  officers.     About  half  of  the  area 

15  See  Dykstra,  "  Cleveland's  Effort  for  City-County  Consolida- 
tion," National  Municipal  Review,  October,  1919,  pp.  551-556. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  441 

and  ninety-eight  per  cent  of  the  population  is  included 
within  municipalities.  The  City  of  Cleveland  is  hemmed 
in  on  every  side  by  incorporated  suburban  cities  and  vil- 
lages. The  situation  is,  therefore,  very  similar  to  that 
in  Chicago,  and  it  is  estimated  that  a  saving  of  20  per 
cent  in  the  cost  of  government  could  be  effected  by  con- 
solidation, or  rather  by  the  establishment  of  Cleveland 
and  its  suburban  area  as  a  city-county  unit. 

Another  city  in  Ohio  which  would  be  aided  in  its 
plans  for  city-county  consolidation  by  the  passage  of  the 
proposed  amendment  is  Cincinnati,  in  Hamilton  County. 
Here  the  city  occupies  a  larger  proportion  of  the  area 
of  the  county  than  is  the  case  with  Cleveland,  some  70 
square  miles  out  of  407,  and  it  contained  in  19 10  about 
78  per  cent  of  the  population.  The  movement  for  con- 
solidation, therefore,  is  receiving  active  support  in  Cin- 
cinnati also.  Other  cities  in  Ohio  face  the  same  problem 
to  a  lesser  extent. 

St.  Louis  was  separted  in  1876  from  St.  Louis  County 
under  provision  of  the  constitution  of  1875  which  also 
gave  the  city  the  right  to  frame  its  own  charter.  The 
city  became  the  proprietor  of  all  county  buildings  and 
property  within  its  enlarged  limits,  assumed  the  whole  of 
the  existing  county  debt  and  was  exempted  from  all 
county  taxation.  The  city  became  entitled  to  the  same 
representation  in  the  General  Assembly,  collected  the  state 
revenue  and  performed  all  other  functions  in  relation  to 
the  state  as  if  it  were  a  county,  though  it  was  not  desig- 
nated as  the  city  and  county  of  St.  Louis.  The  area  of 
St.  Louis  is.  now  61  square  miles,  while  the  area  of  St. 
Louis  County,  to  which  it  formerly  belonged  is  487 
square  miles,  with  an  estimated  population  in  191 3  of 
93,000.  Under  the  constitutional  provision  permitting 
the  separation  of  the  city  from  the  county  the  two  areas 


442  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

together  continued  to  constitute  one  of  the  judicial  cir- 
cuits.16 

The  Missouri  constitution  contemplated  the  further 
application  of  this  principle  of  separation  of  large  cities 
from  the  counties  in  which  they  lie  by  providing  that  in 
all  counties  having  a  city  therein  of  over  100,000  inhabit- 
ants the  city  and  county  government  might  be  consoli- 
dated in  such  manner  as  might  be  provided  by  law.  This 
provision  is  now  applicable  to  Kansas  City  which  in  19 10 
contained  nearly  ninety  per  cent  of  the  population  of 
Jackson  County.  The  area  of  Kansas  City  is  60  square 
miles  while  that  of  the  county  is  more  than  ten  times  as 
large.  This  represents  a  situation  that  is  fairly  typical 
of  the  relation  between  the  cities  of  more  than  250,000 
and  the  counties  in  which  they  lie.  The  obvious  solution 
of  unnecessary  duplication  and  overlapping  jurisdictions 
of  city  and  county  in  such  cases  would  seem  to  be  the  one 
adopted  in  the  case  of  St,  Louis,  namely  the  taking  of  the 
city  completely  out  of  the  county. 

In  Boston  there  has  been  a  partial  consolidation  of 
city  and  county  functions  with  reference  to  Suffolk 
County  in  which  Boston  lies.  There  the  city  comprises 
not  only  more  than  nine-tenths  of  the  population  of  the 
county  but  also  more  than  nine-tenths  of  the  area  of  the 
county.  Boston  has  title  to  all  the  property  of  Suffolk 
County  and  pays  the  entire  expense  of  administration, 
the  financial  officers  of  the  city  acting  in  the  same  capac- 
ity for  the  county.  But  there  remain  some  independently 
elected  and  some  appointive  county  officials  for  judicial 
purposes.  The  situation  there  would  seem  clearly  to 
call  for  complete  consolidation  of  city  and  county.     Uni- 

16  See,  Young,  "  Scheme  of  Separation  of  City  and  County  Gov- 
ernments in  St.  Louis,"  Proceedings  of  American  Political  Science 
Association,  February,  1912,  pp.  97-108. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  443" 

fication,  it  would  seem,  ought  to  go  even  farther  than  that, 
however,  since  metropolitan  Boston,  comprising  an  area 
of  417  square  miles  with  thirty-nine  different  municipali- 
ties in  five  different  counties,  is  really  a  single  community 
with  need  for  a  unified  government.  The  control  of 
certain  functions  in  this  area  has  been  centralized  in  such 
commissions  as  the  metropolitan  park  commission  and 
the  metropolitan  water  and  sewer  boards,  but  the  need  is 
for  complete  unification.  Within  recent  years  proposals 
for  the  consolidation  of  the  metropolitan  district  into 
one  municipality  have  been  introduced  as  bills  in  the  legis- 
lature, but  they  have  not  contemplated  the  abolition  of 
the  county  units  within  the  district.  This  would  seem 
to  be  a  necessary  feature  of  any  adequate  reorganization 
scheme.17 

Baltimore  was.  separated  from  Baltimore  County  as  far 
back  as  185 1  and  has  been  in  all  respects  a  distinct  county 
ever  since,  portions  of  the  county  being  cut  off  success- 
ively and  added  to  the  city  as  the  urban  area  expanded.18 
Under  the  19 15  home-rule  amendment  to  the  Maryland 
constitution  the  privilege  of  framing  and  adopting  char- 
ters has  been  extended  to  the  City  of  Baltimore  as  well 
as  to  the  other  counties  of  the  states. 

San  Francisco  followed  in  the  footsteps  of  Baltimore 
five  years  later  when  the  City  and  County  of  San  Fran- 
cisco was  created.  There  are  some  distinctly  county  of- 
ficers such  as  county  clerk,  auditor,  district  attorney,  sher- 
iff, and  coroner  but  they  are  elected  by  the  people  of  the 
city  and  exercise  jurisdiction  in  the  limits  of  the  corpora- 
tion only,  which  has  an  area  of  43  square  miles.     There 

17  See  Hornell,  "  Boston's  County  Problems,  Annals  of  the  Amer- 
ican Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  May,  1913,  pp.  I34- 
152. 

18  See  McLaughlin  and  Hart,  Cyclopedia  of  American  Govern- 
ment (New  York,  1914),  "Baltimore." 


444  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

would  seem  to  be  no  justification  in  having  these  county 
officers  survive  but  they  are  required  by  the  constitution 
for  every  county.19 

The  California  constitution  was  amended  in  1894  to 
permit  the  merging  and  consolidation  of  city  and  county 
governments  into  one  municipal  government  and  subse- 
quent amendments  extended  the  right  to  frame  home-rule 
consolidated  charters  to  cities  having  more  than  50,000 
inhabitants,  regulating  the  procedure  in  detail.  Los  An- 
geles has  recently  taken  action  looking  toward  the  consol- 
idation of  the  city  and  the  county  governments  under 
these  provisions  of  the  constitution.20  The  City  of  Los 
Angeles  now  has  the  largest  area  of  any  city  in  the  United 
States,  339  square  miles,  due  to  recent  annexations,  but 
it  still  comprises  considerably  less  than  one-tenth  of  the 
area  of  Los  Angeles  County.  Even  in  1910  before  the 
large  annexations  of  surburban  territory  it  comprised 
more  than  three-fifths  of  the  population  of  the  county. 
The  logical  development  in  this  case,  therefore,  involved 
the  separation  of  the  city  from  the  surrounding  county, 
as  in  Baltimore  and  St.  Louis,  and  its  erection  as  a  city 
and  county  corporation,  rather  than  the  merging  of  the 
city  with  the  county  as  in  New  York  and  Boston. 

Another  interesting  development  has  occurred  in  Cali- 
fornia in  Alameda  County,  which  represents  still  another 
phase  of  the  county-city  problem.  There  are  ten  separ- 
ate municipalities  in  the  county,  which  in  19 13  had  a  pop- 
ulation of  283,798  and  an  area  of  732  square  miles.  Of 
this  population  about  nine-tenths  were  living  in  the  ten 
incorporated  municipalities,  the  largest  of  which,  Oak- 
land, had  at  that  time  something  over  150,000  inhabitants. 

19  See  Long,  "  Consolidated  City  and  County  Government  of  San 
Francisco,"  Proceedings  of  the  American  Political  Science  Associa- 
tion, February,  1912,  pp.  109-121. 

20  See  the  American  Year  Book  for  1918,  p.  246. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  445 

For  the  last  ten  years  the  Tax  Association  of  Alameda 
County  has  been  working  on  a  plan  for  a  scheme  of 
government  which  would  eliminate  useless  duplication, 
cut  down  expense,  and  make  possible  united  activities 
without  doing  violence  to  the  local  pride  and  independence 
of  the  constituent  municipalities.21  The  proposals  put 
forward  by  the  Association  involve  the  creation  of  a 
federated  county,  similar  in  some  respects  to  the  plan 
under  which  the  County  of  London  is  governed.  A  gov- 
erning body  of  twenty-one  councilors  elected  by  districts 
would  have  jurisdiction  over  all  matters  that  affect  the 
county  as  a  whole,  such  as  police,  fire,  and  health  protec- 
tion, as  well  as  schools,  the  assessment  of  property  and 
the  collection  of  taxes,  and  auditing  and  the  purchase  of 
supplies.  Water  supply,  sewerage,  and  the  control  of 
public  utilities  for  the  entire  county,  are  also  put  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  board  of  supervisors.  All  jus- 
tice and  police  courts  are  abolished  in  favor  of  an  or- 
ganized municipal  court  for  the  whole  county.  The  cities 
and  surrounding  territory  remain  as  boroughs,  each  with 
five  members  on  the  board,  and  retain  jurisdiction  as  to 
local  works  and  the  levying  of  taxes.  The  actual  admin- 
istration both  in  the  county  and  in  the  boroughs  would  be 
in  the  hands  of  experts  chosen  under  civil-service  rules 
and  regulations,  the  chief  administrative  officer  of  the 
county  being  a  manager.22  An  amendment  to  the  Cali- 
fornia Constitution,  adopted  in  November,  191 8,  per- 
mits the  adoption  of  this  plan  by  the  county,  so  that  it 

21  See  Requa,  "The  Government  of  Alameda  County,"  Annals  of 
the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  May,  1913. 
pp.  237-247,  for  a  description  of  Alameda  County  and  the  conditions 
prevailing  there  which  led  to  the  reform  movement. 

22  See  the  pamphlets  of  the  City  and  County  Government  Associa- 
tion, Oakland,  California,  1916-1919.  Also  a  brief  description  in 
Gilbertson,  The  County,  pp.  159-163. 


446  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

is  now  within  the  power  of  the  county  to  give  this  ex- 
periment a  trial. 

The  federation  plan  urged  in  Alameda  County  would 
be  applicable  to  the  solution  of  the  city-county  problem  in 
other  counties  presenting  a  like  situation,  namely,  where 
a  county  is  largely  urban  but  comprises  a  number  of 
independently  developed  municipalities  which  would  not 
consent  to  incorporation  with  the  largest  one.  This  con- 
dition is  found  for  instance  in  the  two  largest  counties 
in  New  Jersey,  Hudson  and  Essex  Counties.23 

New  Orleans  is  the  only  city  besides  New  York  which 
contains  a  county  completely  within  it,  as  the  Parish  of 
Orleans  lies  within  the  city,  and  is  identified  with. it  in 
the  Census  population  statistics.  Some  of  the  regular 
parish  officers  are  lacking  in  the  Parish  of  Orleans,  not- 
ably the  police  jury  and  the  constables,  but  there  are  spe- 
cial parish  officers  such  as  the  sheriffs,  tax  assessors,  reg- 
ister of  conveyances,  recorder  of  mortgages  and  judicial 
officers.24  This  would  seem  to  offer  a  clear  case  where 
complete  consolidation  of  city  and  county  would  be  de- 
sirable. 

The  last  city  to  be  considered  in  which  there  has  been 
accomplished  a  union  of  city  and  county  governments 
is  Denver,  Colorado,  which  by  an  amendment  to  the  state 
constitution  adopted  in  1902  was  declared  to  be  a  single 
body  politic  and  corporate  by  the  name  of  the  City  and 
County  of  Denver.     The  amendment  abolished  the  dupli- 

23  See  for  a  description  of  Hudson  County  with  proposals  for 
federation  and  consolidation,  Crecraft,  "The  Government  of  Hud- 
son County"  (Jersey  City,  1915),  comprised  in  the  collection  of 
Documents  on  County  Government  of  the  National  Short  Ballot 
Organization. 

24  See  Scroggs,  "Parish  Government  in  Louisiana,"  Annals  of 
the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  May,  1913. 
P.  43- 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS 


447 


cate  sets  of  county  and  city  officers  within  the  new  cor- 
poration by  making  the  existing  county  officers,  officers 
of  the  City  and  County  of  Denver.  But  owing  to  litiga- 
tion in  the  courts  the  new  scheme  was  first  sustained  then 
set  aside  and  again  sustained,  being  finally  settled  in  favor 
of  the  consolidation  provision  in  191 1.  The  consolida- 
tion of  city  and  county  officers  in  Denver  seems  to  have 
proved  its  wisdom  in  spite  of  very  turbulent  political  con- 
ditions in  the  last  decade.25 

The  list  of  cities  in  which  the  city-county  consolidation 
project  has  become  a  live  issue  within  the  last  few  years 
includes  most  of  the  other  cities  with  more  than  a  quarter 
of  a  million  inhabitants,  and  some  that  are  smaller. 
Among  these  may  be  mentioned  Buffalo,  Rochester,  Pitts- 
burgh, Kansas  City,  Indianapolis,  Portland,  and  Seattle.20 
In  these  cities  the  problem  is  rather  one  of  separation  of 
the  city  and  its  surrounding  territory  from  the  county, 

25  See  Guthrie,  "  The  City  and  County  of  Denver,"  a  paper  read 
at  the  Detroit  meeting  of  the  National  Municipal  League  in  Novem- 
ber, 1917,  printed  in  pamphlet  form  by  the  National  Municipal 
League  and  comprised  in  the  collection  of  Documents  on  County 
Government. 

26  The  following  table  will  show  the  relation  between  the  area  and 
population  of  the  cities  mentioned  and  the  counties  in  which  they  lie : 


Percent- 

City Area, 

Area,  1910, 

age  of 

City 

County 

1916, 

County 

Popula- 

sq. m. 

sq.  m. 

tion  in  the 
City,  1910 

Buffalo   

Erie    

42 

1,034 

80 

Rochester    

Monroe    .... 

24 

663 

7i 

Pittsburgh   .... 

Allegheny    . . 

4i 

725 

52 

Kansas  City  . . . 

Jackson    .... 

58 

610 

87 

Indianapolis    . . 

Marion   

40 

397 

88 

Multnomah    . 

66 

451 

9i 

Seattle    

King  

9i 

2,111 

83 

448  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

and  its  establishment  as  a  city-county  unit,  than  one  of 
true  consolidation  as  in  Philadelphia,  San  Francisco,  and 
Boston,  as  the  city  comprises  but  a  relatively  small  portion 
of  the  area  of  the  county,  though  a  relatively  large  pro- 
portion of  the  population. 

There  remain  three  cities  in  the  list  of  the  first  twenty- 
five,  according  to  the  19 10  Census,  which  have  not  been 
mentioned.  These  are  Milwaukee,  Washington,  and 
Minneapolis.  Milwaukee  County  presents  a  fearful  pic- 
ture as  regards  organization,  there  being  43  elected  county 
officials  in  addition  to  89  city,  state,  and  national  officials 
elected  in  the  city.27  The  City  of  Milwaukee  in  19 16 
comprised  an  area  of  26  square  miles  as  compared  with 
235  square  miles  for  the  county  as  a  whole.  The  city 
in  1910  contained  85  per  cent  of  the  population  of  the 
county.  It  presents  a  situation  essentially  similar,  there- 
fore, to  the  one  found  in  the  other  cities  considered  and 
the  question  of  consolidation,  though  not  touched  upon 
in  the  191 5  report  has  since  been  investigated  by  the  City 
Club. 

Washington,  D.  C,  although  under  a  peculiar  form  of 
government  as  the  capital  of  the  nation,  presents  another 
instance  of  a  failure  to  carry  consolidation  of  agencies  to 
its  logical  conclusion  both  as  to  the  courts  and  as  to  mat- 
ters of  local  administration.28 

Minneapolis  presents  another  typical  instance  calling 
for  separation  of  city  from  county,  and  yet  although  the 
constitution  of  Minnesota  has  contained  a  provision  since 
1857  permitting  the  legislature  to  organize  any  city  of 

27  See  "Milwaukee  County  Government,"  Bulletin  of  the  Mil- 
waukee City  Club,  1915,  comprised  in  the  collection  of  Documents 
on  County  Government  of  the  National  Short  Ballot  Organization. 

28  See  Bulletin  No.  11  for  the  Illinois  Constitutional  Convention, 
of  1920,  pp.  963-965. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  449 

more  than  20,000  inhabitants  into  a  separate  county,  no 
action  has  apparently  been  taken  with  regard  to  either 
Minneapolis  or  St.  Paul  in  this  direction. 

Finally  attention  may  again  be  called  to  the  fact  that 
in  Virginia  all  cities,  and  that  means  incorporated  places 
of  more  than  5,000  inhabitants,  are  separate  from  coun- 
ties and  themselves  perform  county  functions  to  a  large 
extent. 

From  the  preceding  survey  of  the  situation  as  regards 
county  and  city  consolidation  in  the  twenty-five  largest 
cities  of  the  country,  it  may  be  seen  that  there  is  a 
measure  of  consolidation  provided  in  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  them,  and  that  within  the  last  few  years  a  decided 
trend  in  that  direction  has  made  itself  noticeable.  The 
failure  of  the  proposed  constitutional  amendment  in  Ore- 
gon in  19 19,  the  partial  and  unsuccessful  attempts  in  Cook 
County  in  1907  and  191 3,  and  the  so  far  successful  op- 
position to  the  Ohio  proposals,  cannot  alter  the  fact  that 
the  movement  for  readjustment  of  city  and  county  rela- 
tions in  the  larger  cities  of  the  country  has  gained  a 
very  definite  momentum  within  the  last  ten  years,  a  mo- 
mentum which  in  all  likelihood  will  result  within  the  next 
few  years  in  making  the  city-county  organization  a  typi- 
cal one  for  cities  of  more  than  200,000  population 
which  constitute  the  outstanding  municipality  in  the 
county.  Where  a  number  of  independently  developed, 
sizeable  communities  exist  in  a  county  the  federated  county 
on  the  Alameda  plan  seems  to  offer  a  promising  scheme 
for  reorganization. 

Agencies  for  the  Study  and  Reform  of  County 
Government. —  Not  the  least  important  of  the  develop- 
ments of  the  past  decade  in  the  field  of  county  govern- 
ment are  the  agencies  that  have  developed  for  the  study 


450  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

and  reform  of  county  government.  Ten  years  ago  the 
subject  of  county  government  in  the  United  States  was 
indeed  the  unexplored  and  "  dark  continent  of  American 
politics."  Almost  the  only  persons  who  were  interested 
in  or  acquainted  with  county  government  were  the  politi- 
cians who  thrived  thereon.  Local,  state,  and  national 
reform  associations  had  developed  and  multiplied  in  the 
field  of  city  government  and  the  literature  of  that  subject 
was  extensive.  City  Clubs,  tax  associations,  research 
bureaus,  state  conferences,  national  associations,  were  in- 
cluded among  the  numerous  agencies  of  city  government 
reform,  and  the  leading  universities  of  the  country  were 
beginning  to  offer  special  courses  in  the  study  of  munici- 
pal problems.  But  nothing  of  the  kind  existed  in  relation 
to  county  government.  With  a  single  exception,  no  com- 
prehensive general  description  or  discussion  of  American 
county  government  was  available.29  No  local  associa- 
tions of  citizens  were  concerned  with  the  study  and  re- 
form of  county  government.  City  Clubs  and  research 
bureaus  ignored  the  field  of  county  government.  State 
conferences  on  county  government  were  unknown.  The 
national  political  science  and  civic  organizations  all  but 
passed  by  the  subject  of  county  government.  Universi- 
ty courses  in  county  government  were  unknown. 

In  the  brief  period  of  the  last  ten  years,  however,  all 
this  has  changed  in  an  astonishing  measure.  City  Clubs 
have  extended  their  field  of  investigation  into  the  county 
field.30  Special  local  associations  for  the  study  and  re- 
form of  county  government  have  developed."1     National 

2U  Professor  Fairlie's  book  on  Local  Government  was  first  pub- 
lished in  1906. 

30  As  in  Cleveland,  Ohio,  and  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin. 

31  As  for  instance  the  Alameda  County  Taxpayers'  Association 
in  California,  the  Westchester  County  Research  Bureau,  and  the 
Nassau  County  Association  in  New  York. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  451 

research  agencies  have  gone  into  the  study  of  the  county 
field.32  State  conferences  on  county  government  have 
been  held,33  national  and  municipal  reform  agencies  have 
broadened  their  scope  to  include  specifically  county  gov- 
ernment as  a  field  of  activity,34  general  governmental  re- 
form agencies  are  concentrating  their  energies  on  county 
government35  national  political  science  associations  have 
devoted  special  attention  to  the  county  problem,36  and 
even  universities  are  commencing  to  recognize  the  impor- 
tance of  the  county  by  offering  special  courses  in  county 
government.37  The  University  of  North  Carolina  has 
recently  undertaken  to  stimulate  interest  in  the  problems 
of  the  county  by  organizing  home-county  clubs  through- 
out the  state.38 

As  a  result  o-f  this#  general  awakening  the  literature  on 
county  government  has  developed  in  the  last  years  to  the 
point  where  intelligent  study  and  investigation  have  been 
made  possible,  at  the  same  time  that  a  more  general  in- 
terest in  the  problems  of  county  government  has  been 
aroused.  The  effect  of  this  development  on  the  future 
of  county  government  in  the  United  States,  of  course, 
cannot  be  definitely  foretold,  but  that  it  will  be  consid- 
erable, if  the  next  ten  years  show  as  much  advance  in 

32  As  the  New  York  Bureau  of  Municipal  Reasearch,  the  Russell 
Sage  Foundation,  and  the  Chicago  Bureau  of  Public  Efficiency. 

33  The  Conferences  for  Better  County  Government  in  New  York 
State. 

34  The  National  Municipal  League  and  the  American  City  Bureau. 
85  The  National  Short  Ballot  Organization. 

36  The  American  Political  Science  Association  at  its  eighth  an- 
nual meeting  in  191  r,  and  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and 
Social  Science  in  its  special  volume  on  County  Government,  1913. 

37  Among  them  may  be  mentioned  the  University  of  Texas,  the 
University  of  Michigan,  and  the  University  of  Illinois. 

38  See  the  University  of  North  Carolina  Bulletin  containing  the 
"  Syllabus  of  Home-County  Club  Studies,"  September,  1914. 


452  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  directions  noted  as  have  the  last  ten  years,  can  hardly 
be  doubted. 

City  Government 

In  the  field  of  city  government  the  developments  have 
been  no  less  significant,  though  perhaps  not  so  startling 
as  in  the  field  of  county  government.  They  may  be  con- 
veniently considered  under  much  the  same  heads  as  were 
those  in  the  latter  category. 

Home  Rule. —  Ten  years  ago  only  eight  states  had 
granted  to  cities  the  right  to  frame  and  adopt  their  own 
charters,39  although  thirty-five  years  had  elapsed  since 
the  first  state  took  such  action.  In  the  last  decade  five 
more  states  have  taken  such  action  40  and  in  three  more 
states  41  the  legislature  has  approved  home-rule  amend- 
ments which  will  have  to  be  passed  again  before  submis- 
sion to  the  voters.42  Furthermore  three  or  four  states 
have  within  the  last  ten  years  granted  or  attempted  to 
grant  the  home-rule  charter  power  to  cities  by  legisla- 
tion,43 though  in  Wisconsin  the  act  was  held  invalid  as 
an  unconstitutional  delegation  of  legislative  power.  Fi- 
nally a  dozen  states  have  passed  optional  charter  laws 
permitting  cities  to  choose  which  one  of  several  forms  of 
charter  they  wish  to  adopt.44  Of  the  two  hundred  or 
more  cities  that  have  adopted  charters  under  these  con- 
stitutional home-rule  provisions,  the  largest  number  have 
done  so  in  the  last  ten  years. 

30  Missouri,  California,  Washington,  Minnesota,  Colorado,  Ore- 
gon, Oklahoma,  and  Michigan. 

40  Arizona,  Ohio,  Nebraska,  Texas,  and  Maryland. 

41  New  York,  Wisconsin,  and  Pennsylvania. 

42  The  rejected  New  York  Constitution  of  1915  contained  home- 
rule  provisions. 

43  Connecticut,  Florida,  Wisconsin,  and  New  York. 

44  Among  them  New  York,  Massachusetts,  North  Carolina,  and 
Virginia. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  453 

The  movement  for  constitutional  home  rule  in  cities 
may  therefore  be  said  to  have  made  almost  as  much 
progress  in  the  last  ten  years  as  it  had  in  the  preceding 
thirty-five. 

Charter  Reform. —  It  has  already  been  pointed  out 
that  the  most  interesting  development  in  the  field  of  char- 
ter reform  in  American  cities  is  the  origin  and  develop- 
ment of  the  commission-manager  plan,  which  is  wholly 
a  product  of  the  last  decade.  Aside  from  the  rapidity 
with  which  this  new  type  of  government  has  spread,45 
the  most  interesting  feature  of  its  development  is  per- 
haps the  fact  that  in  the  last  years  it  is  being  adopted  by 
an  increasing  number  of  larger  cities,  that  is  cities  of  more 
than  50,000  population.  Until  19 15  Dayton,  Ohio,  was 
the  only  city  with  more  than  50,000  inhabitants  operating 
under  this  plan.  By  1920  there  were  nine  such  cities, 
and  two  more  were  added  in  that  year.  Four  of  these 
cities  had  a  population  of  more  than  100,000  in  that 
year.  It  is  now  being  seriously  agitated  in  other  cities 
of  more  than  100,000  and  its  spread  in  that  class  of  cities 
seems  certain. 

Commission  government,  on  the  other  hand,  which  had 
its  origin  and  early  development  in  the  preceding  decade, 
having  been  adopted  by  over  a  hundred  cities  in  19 10,  al- 
though it  attained  its  most  rapid  growth  in  the  first  half 

45  The  growth  in  the  number  of  cities  operating  under  the  city- 
manager  plan  is  shown  by  the  following  table  compiled  from  figures 
given  in  the  annual  statements  in  the  American  Year  Book: 

1913  12 

1914  33 

1915  37 

1916  19 

1917  23 

1918  31 

1919  36 

In  1920  some  twenty-five  cities  were  added  to  the  list. 


454  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

of  the  present  decade,  has  suffered  a  marked  check  in  its 
further  spread  the  last  five  years  chiefly  owing  to  the  ap- 
peal made  by  the  commission-manager  plan.  Only  sev- 
enty-five cities  adopted  commission  government  in  the 
years  1916-1919  and  that  was  largely  limited  to  cities 
which  were  not  empowered  to  adopt  the  manager  form. 
All  indications  point,  therefore,  to  an  ever  smaller  num- 
ber of  cities  adopting  commission  government,  as  well  as 
to  the  steadily  increasing  shift  from  that  type  to  the 
manager  form. 

But  the  increase  of  commission  and  commission-man- 
ager charters  is  not  the  only  feature  worthy  of  note  in 
the  charter  development  of  the  last  ten  years,  for  among 
cities  operating  under  the  mayor-and-council  form,  and 
that,  as  has  been  seen,  includes  the  great  majority  of 
American  cities,  especially  of  those  having  as  many  as 
two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  inhabitants,  there  have 
been  many  notable  charter  developments.  Some  of  the 
more  important  of  these  developments  may  be  briefly  men- 
tioned here. 

In  1 9 10  there  went  into  effect  a  new  charter  for  the  city 
of  Boston  which  marked  some  extreme  changes  in  the 
system  of  city  government.  Instead  of  the  bicameral 
council  provided  under  the  charter  of  1904,  comprising 
75  councilmen  and  13  aldermen,  there  was  provided  a 
single  chambered  council  of  nine  members  elected  at  large 
on  non-partisan  ballots.  The  importance  of  the  mayor 
was  greatly  increased  under  the  new  charter.  He  was 
given  a  large  appointing  power,  free  from  the  participa- 
tion of  the  council  which  had  existed  under  the  earlier 
charters.  The  only  check  upon  the  appointing  power 
of  the  mayor  with  regard  to  heads  of  departments  and 
city  commissions  was  provided  in  a  novel  device  which 
requires  the  mayor  to  file  a  certificate  for  transmission 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  455 

to  the  state  civil-service  commission  to  the  effect  that  the 
nominee  is  a  recognized  expert  in  his  work  or  is  especially 
fitted  by  education,  training,  or  experience  for  the  post. 
The  state  commission  may  refuse  to  approve  of  the  ap- 
pointment as  not  meeting  the  specifications,  in  which  case 
the  appointment  lapses  at  the  end  of  thirty  days  and  the 
mayor  must  submit  another  name.  But  the  mayor  may 
remove  such  officials  without  concurrence  by  the  civil 
service  commission.  Appointments  to  subordinate  po- 
sitions are  subject  to  the  state  civil  service  commission 
in  all  Massachusetts  cities.  The  mayor  under  the  new 
charter  drafts  the  budget  alone  and  the  council  may  make 
no  changes  except  by  way  of  reduction.  In  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  bicameral  feature,  in  the  reduction  in  the  size 
of  the  council,  in  the  substitution  of  non-partisan  nomina- 
tion and  election  for  the  former  party  procedure,  in  the 
substitution  of  a  general  ticket  for  ward  elections,  and 
in  the  material  strengthening  of  the  powers  of  the  mayor, 
therefore,  this  new  Boston  charter  was  very  significant  as 
indicative  of  the  approved  lines  of  municipal  organization. 
The  small  council  and  election-at-large  feature  have, 
however,  been  repeatedly  attacked  by  the  politicians,  and 
in  1920,  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts  passed  a  bill 
increasing  the  membership  of  the  council  and  making 
them  elective  by  districts.  The  bill  was  supported  by 
both  the  Republican  and  Democratic  organizations  in  Bos- 
ton and  the  Governor  signed  the  bill  in  spite  of  protests 
of  the  Boston  Charter  Association,  the  Chamber  of  Com- 
merce, and  the  Good  Government  Association,  on  the 
ground  that  the  provision  for  a  local  referendum  in  No- 
vember, 1920,  on  the  proposed  changes  put  it  up  to  the 
voters  of  Boston.40  These  proposals  were  defeated  at 
the  polls  at  that  election. 

*6  National  Municipal  Review,  July,  1920,  p.  456. 


456  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

The  salient  features  of  the  Boston  charter  of  1909  as 
described  above  were  reproduced  in  the  charters  of  Pitts- 
burgh, Seattle,  and  Los  Angeles  within  the  next  two 
years. 

In  1 91 3  Cleveland  adopted  a  new  charter  under  the 
home-rule  powers  accorded  by  the  constitutional  amend- 
ment of  the  preceding  year.  The  council  was  reduced 
from  33  members  to  26,  elected  one  from  each  ward  by 
non-partisan  primaries  and  elections  by  means  of  the 
preferential  ballot.  The  initiative,  referendum,  and  re- 
call are  provided,  as  is  also  the  civil-service  merit  system 
for  subordinate  employees,  the  mayor  having  the  power 
to  appoint  and  remove  the  directors  of  the  six  depart- 
ments. 

In  19 1 4  St.  Louis  adopted  a  new  charter.  Here,  as  in 
Boston,  a  bicameral  council  was  superseded  by  a  uni- 
cameral council,  the  28  members  of  the  house  of  dele- 
gates and  the  13  in  the  council  being  replaced  by  a  single 
body  of  28  members,  one  to  be  from  each  ward  but 
elected  on  general  ticket,  a  unique  feature  in  American 
charters.  The  initiative,  referendum,  and  recall  were  in- 
cluded in  the  charter,  but  the  state  laws  did  not  permit 
the  insertion  of  non-partisan  nominations  and  elections. 
The  St.  Louis  charter,  therefore,  also  reflected,  though 
to  a  lesser  degree  than  did  the  Boston  charter,  the  ten- 
dency toward  simplification  of  the  council  organiza- 
tion. By  a  law  passed  in  19 13  the  appointment  of  the 
police  board  in  St.  Louis  was  taken  from  the  Governor 
and  given  to  the  mayor.  The  latter  was  also  permitted 
to  remove  members  of  the  board.  If  the  Governor,  who 
also  retained  the  removal  power,  removes  the  whole  board, 
he  may  name  the  new  board. 

In  the  same  year  a  home-rule  charter  was  adopted  by 
Columbus,  Ohio,  which  reduced  the  size  of  the  council 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  457 

to  seven  members,  elected  at  large  on  a  non-partisan 
ballot.  The  independently  elected  mayor  was  retained 
but  his  veto  over  the  action  of  the  council  was  made 
purely  advisory. 

Another  Ohio  city  to  adopt  a  home-rule  charter  in 
1914  was  Toledo,  which  adopted  the  so-called  "  federal 
plan"  provided  in  the  law  of  1913  and  followed  by 
Cleveland  in  its  charter  of  the  preceding  year.  The  only 
elective  officers  are  the  mayor,  vice-mayor,  and  council- 
men.  The  mayor  has  the  power  of  appointing  and  re- 
moving the  six  department  heads.  The  newer  features 
of  non-partisan  preferential  ballots,  and  the  initiative 
referendum,  and  recall  were  all  included  in  the  new 
charter. 

In  19 1 8  Detroit  adopted  a  new  charter  which  added  that 
city  to  the  list  of  those  reducing  the  size  of  their  council. 
Instead  of  42  aldermen  elected  by  wards  the  new  council 
consists  of  nine  members  elected  at  large.  Non-partisan 
primaries  and  elections  are  provided  for  as  also  the  ini- 
tiative, referendum,  and  recall.  The  mayor  appoints  and 
removes  all  boards  and  commissions,  except  that  he  may 
not  remove  the  civil-service  commission,  and  is  respon- 
sible for  the  budget,  seven  adverse  votes  in  the  council 
being  required  to  prevent  his  putting  the  budget  into  ef- 
fect. Here  also,  therefore,  the  strong-mayor  type  is  com- 
bined, as  in  Boston,  with  the  small  council  elected  at 
large. 

Other  charters  or  amendments  adopted  in  19 18  which 
reflect  some  or  all  of  the  tendencies  noted  were  those  of 
Akron,  Ohio,  which  reduced  the  council  to  eight  members 
elected  at  large  on  non-partisan  ballots  and  included  the  in- 
itiative, referendum,  and  recall,  as  well  as  the  appointment 
of  chief  administrator  who  is  for  all  practical  purposes 
a  city  manager ;  and  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin,  in  which  the 


458  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

council  was  reduced  from  37  members  to  25.  The  new 
charter  adopted  in  the  same  year  by  Baltimore  under  the 
home-rule  amendment  of  191 5  introduced  no  new  fea- 
tures except  the  application  of  the  civil-service  merit 
system. 

Finally  in  191 9  a  new  charter  was  enacted  for  the 
City  of  Philadelphia,  as  has  been  noted  elsewhere.  It 
will  be  well  to  point  out  here  again,  however,  that  in  the 
abolition  of  the  bicameral  council,  and  especially  the  re- 
duction of  the  size  of  the  council  to  21  members,  the  lat- 
est metropolitan  city  charter  follows  in  the  footsteps  of 
Boston,  St.  Louis,  and  Detroit  and  other  large  cities  se- 
curing new  charters  within  the  decade.  The  councilmen 
are  not  elected  at  large,  however,  nor  on  the  other  hand 
are  they  elected  by  the  old  wards,  but  from  the  eight 
senatorial  districts  in  the  city,  on  the  basis  of  the  number 
of  the  assessed  voters  in  each.  In  the  strengthening  of 
the  mayor's  powers  over  the  budget,  and  in  the  adoption 
of  a  rigid  civil-service  merit  system  the  Philadelphia 
charter  follows  along  the  lines  established  by  these  other 
charters. 

To  sum  up  then,  charter  activity  during  the  last  decade 
among  cities  retaining  the  mayor-and-council  form 
clearly  shows  the  following  tendencies :  the  abandonment 
of  the  bicameral  principle;  reduction  in  the  size  of  the 
council ;  abolition  of  the  ward  system  of  election ;  intro- 
duction of  non-partisan  nomination  and  election  com- 
bined with  preferential  ballots;  strengthening  of  the  ad- 
ministrative and  financial  powers  of  the  mayor;  exten- 
sion of  the  civil-service  merit  system;  and  spread  of  the 
instruments  of  popular  control,  the  intiative,  referendum, 
and  recall.  It  seems  likely,  therefore,  that  these  are  the 
accepted  lines  along  .which  modifications  of  the  mayor- 
and-council  type  will  occur  in  future  charter  changes. 


RECENT  DEVELOPMENTS  459 

New  Activities. —  Throughout  the  decade  just  past 
there  has  been  manifest  a  general  tendency  to  enlarge  the 
activities  of  cities  in  the  general  direction  of  social  wel- 
fare work,  particularly  in  the  matter  of  public  recreation. 
City  planning  as  a  municipal  activity  has  also  developed 
general  application  only  within  the  last  ten  years.  Mu- 
nicipal ownership  and  operation  of  public  utilities  have 
also  shown  significant  extensions  and  advance  in  new 
fields.  Among  the  long  established  city  activities  public 
health  has  perhaps  shown  the  greatest  improvement  within 
the  last  decade.  The  era  of  high  prices  combined  with 
rigidly  limited  financial  resources  has  undoubtedly 
checked  to  a  considerable  extent  the  entering  upon  new 
undertakings  by  cities  during  the  last  half  of  the  past 
decade,  but  increased  demands  for  service  by  cities  will 
inevitably  result  in  still  further  expansions,  in  spite  of 
these  deterring  factors.47 

Municipal  Reform  Agencies.48 — Although  the  study 
and  reform  of  municipal  government  had  made  gratify- 
ing progress  during  the  decade  from  1900  to  19 10,  much 
more  substantial  progress  has  been  made  during  the  ten 
years  just  past.  The  increase  in  the  number  of  city 
clubs  and  citizens  associations,  the  establishment  of  city 
research  bureaus,  the  formation  of  state  municipal 
leagues,  increased  emphasis  on  city  government  in  the 
political-science  teaching  in  our  universities,  and  a  phe- 
nomenal increase  in  literature  on  municipal  government, 
have  all  characterized  the  decade  just  past  much  more 
even  than  the  preceding  one.     That  these  various  reform 

47  The  annual  volumes  of  the  American  Year  Book  since  1910 
furnish  a  valuable  record  of  the  developments  in  municipal  activities 
under  such  heads  as  Research,  Budgets,  and  Finance ;  City  Plan- 
ning; Housing;  Fire,  and  Police. 

48  See  Munro,  The  Government  of  American  Cities,  Chap,  xiv, 
for  a  discussion  of  municipal  reform  and  reformers. 


460  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

agencies  have  not  attained  maximum  results  is  certain, 
but  that  the  encouraging  improvement  in  city  govern- 
ment during  the  last  generation  has  been  directly  due  to 
the  interest  and  energy  of  thousands  of  public  spirited 
citizens,  ridiculed  as  reformers,  is  equally  evident.  The 
price  of  successful  government,  no  less  than  of  liberty, 
is  eternal  vigilance  and  it  is  these  various  reform  agen- 
cies which  must  be  looked  to  to  stimulate  and  direct  the 
vigilance  of  the  great  mass  of  citizens.  Their  further 
spread  and  development  may  be  regarded,  therefore,  in 
view  of  the  record  of  the  past  ten  years,  as  a  consumma- 
tion devoutly  to  be  desired. 


CHAPTER  IX 
CONCLUSION 

We  have  seen  as  a  result  of  the  preceding  survey  of 
local  government  in  the  United  States  that  there  are  in 
every  state  two  kinds  of  local  government.  One  of  these 
is  distinctly  urban  in  character,  that  is,  it  is  a  government 
for  relatively  restricted  areas  with  relatively  dense  pop- 
ulation, the  units  being  variously  designated  villages, 
towns,  boroughs,  or  cities.  These  units  are  created  pri- 
marily for  the  satisfaction  of  distinctly  local  needs,  that 
is,  needs  which  the  people  of  the  community  have  in 
common  because  of  their  very  proximity.  The  other 
kind  of  local  government  found  in  every  state  of  the 
Union  is  characteristically  rural,  that  is,  it  is1  a  govern- 
ment for  relatively  extensive  areas  with  relatively  sparse 
population,  and  is  known  all  but  universally  as  the  county. 
This  area  of  local  government  developed  originally 
merely  as  an  administrative  unit  of  the  state  government, 
and  is  still  regarded  chiefly  in  that  light,  though  it  has 
come  also  to  be  accorded  powers  intended  for  the  satis- 
faction of  local  needs. 

In  addition  to  these  two  types  of  local  government, 
there  is  found  in  a  considerable  portion  of  the  United 
States,  a  third  form,  intermediate  between  the  two  first 
mentioned,  both  as  to  area  and  as  to  its  essential  nature, 
which  is  commonly  known  as  the  township.  Finally, 
there  is  a  great  variety  of  special  local  governmental 
areas  for  particular  purposes,  commonly  known  as  dis- 
tricts, which  may  or  may  not  coincide  with  the  areas  ot 

461 


462  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

the  urban  commtiniti'es  or  of  the  other  subdivisions  of  the 
counties. 

All  of  these  units  of  local  government  are  alike  in  this 
that  they  have  locally  elected  officers  to  administer  their 
activities.  To  that  extent  they  are  areas  of  local  self- 
government,  irrespective  of  the  kind  of  functions  they 
perform.  They  are  alike  in  this  also  that  they  are  wholly 
subject  to  the  control  of  the  state,  a  control  exercised  to 
a  considerable  extent  by  express  constitutional  provisions, 
both  negative  and  positive;  to  an  even  larger  .extent  by 
the  state  legislatures;  and  to  a  relatively  small  but  con- 
tinually increasing  extent  by  administrative  authorities 
of  the  state  government. 

The  first  question  that  naturally  arises  with  regard  to 
this  rather  complicated  system  of  local  administration  is 
to  what  extent  all  these  areas  fulfill  necessary  functions. 
Their  historical  origin  and  development  have  already 
been  fully  considered  and  their  existence  in  this  country 
may  be  largely  explained  on  the  basis  of  inheritance  and 
tradition.  But  the  present  day  justification  of  this  com- 
plex system  must  rest  on  other  grounds  than  mere  tradi- 
tion. 

The  City. —  So  far  as  the  urban  areas  of  local  gov- 
ernment are  concerned  there  seems  to  be  adequate  reason 
for  constituting  each  distinct  aggregation  of  population 
within  a  limited,  area  a  unit  of  local  self-government. 
Cities  are  not  merely  historically  governmental  units  but 
they  are  also  naturally  so.  Some  of  the  most  important 
governmental  needs  either  arise  from  urban  conditions  or 
are  accentuated  by  them,  as  for  instance  police  and  fire 
protection,  the  preservation  of  public  health,  the  pro- 
vision of  a  water  supply,  street  paving  and  sidewalks,  etc. 
Community  problems  require  community  action  and 
within  the  relatively  restricted  area  of  a  city  there  is  a 


CONCLUSION  463 

real  possibility  of  developing  community  spirit  and  com- 
munity patriotism,  which  are  essentials  for  a  successful 
democratic  government.  The  community  needs  are  most 
clearly  realized  in  and  by  the  community  and  it  is  the 
community  that  directly  benefits  by  their  satisfaction  and 
directly  suffers  from  their  neglect.  Therefore  a  logical 
scheme  of  government  confers  the  largest  possible  powers 
of  local  self-government  on  urban  communities.  It  is 
simply  not  possible  practically  to  have  a  single  central 
governmental  agency  charged  with  the  administration  of 
these  local  affairs,  which  in  spite  of  their  general  similar- 
ity vary  considerably  in  the  different  communities.  This 
theoretical  proposition  has  furthermore  been  demon- 
strated in  a  practical  way  in  American  experience  through 
the  failure  of  such  minute  and  detailed  legislative  regu- 
lation of  municipal  affairs  as  has  been  attempted  in  a 
great  many  of  our  states. 

If  it  be  granted  that  a  proper  governmental  scheme  de- 
mands that  communities  be  charged  with  the  duty  and 
power  of  regulating  community  affairs,  a  difficult  ques- 
tion still  remains  in  determining  at  what  point  such 
special  local  conditions  arise  as  to  warrant  separate  local 
machinery.  We  have  already  seen  that  village  govern- 
ment exists  in  some  of  our  states  in  communities  with  as 
few  as  a  hundred  inhabitants.  In  France,  it  will  be  re- 
membered, the  number  of  communes  with  less  than  that 
population  runs  into  the  hundreds,  while  in  England 
some  two  thousand  parishes  contain  less  than  a  hundred 
inhabitants  each.  Both  in  England  and  in  France  there 
is  a  feeling  that  such  diminutive  communities  are  really 
too  insignificant  to  warrant  a  local  governmental  ma- 
chinery, and  when  it  is  remembered  that  a  population  of 
a  hundred  inhabitants  normally  means  an  average  of  only 
a  score  of  houses,  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  any  real  com- 


464  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

munity  problems  arising,  even  if  all  the  houses  were 
clustered  about  a  cross  roads.  But  when  the  population 
of  a  community  attains  five  hundred,  with  a  hundred 
houses  within  a  restricted  area,  it  seems  equally  clear  that 
real  community  needs  and  problems  may  arise,  though  in 
a  rudimentary  form  only,  which  justify  a  simple  local 
governmental  organization.  At  some  point,  therefore, 
between  these  two  figures  it  would  seem  that  a  special 
local  government  organization  would  be  desirable.  As 
the  population  of  the  communities  increases  the  nature 
and  extent  of  the  community  needs  develop  and  call  for 
larger  powers  and  more  extended  organization,  but  the 
principle  on  which  a  special  governmental  organization 
and  a  sphere  of  local  governmental  action  are  accorded 
to  communities  remains  the  same  throughout. 

Such  semi-urban  and  urban  communities  must,  how- 
ever, be  subjected  to  a  measure  of  state  control,  since  few 
if  any  of  these  so-called  local  functions  are  purely  of 
local  concern,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out.  The 
line  between  local  and  central  functions  cannot  be  def- 
initely drawn  either  in  theory  or  practice,  and  indeed  there 
is  an  almost  imperceptible  gradation  from  the  activities 
of  the  community  which  seem  to  concern  only  itself,  to 
those  activities  in  which  the  community  acts  as  the  agent 
of  the  state  government  in  matters  of  general  concern. 
In  general  it  may  be  said,  however,  that  the  larger  the 
city  becomes,  the  more  intimately  are  the  general  inter- 
ests of  the  state  as  a  whole  bound  up  with  its  activities. 
A  larger  measure  of  state  administrative  control  should, 
therefore,  properly  accompany  the  larger  measure  of 
power  that  is  accorded  to  the  more  important  cities. 

This  state  administrative  control,  as  has  previously 
been  suggested,  should  for  its  effective  exercise  be  to  a 
large  extent  centralized  in  an  agency  established  for  the 


CONCLUSION  465 

express  supervision  of  local  governments,  on  the  general 
plan  of  the  French  Ministry  of  the  Interior,  or  of  the 
former  English  Local  Government  Board.  An  adequate 
staff  of  experts  who  could  investigate,  advise,  and,  when 
necessary,  control  the  action  of  the  municipalities,  would 
make  it  possible  to  enlarge  the  scope  of  action  of  cities 
very  considerably  beyond  the  extent  to  which  they  now 
possess  it  even  in  the  so-called  home-rule  states,  without 
the  dangers  which  would  attend  the  granting  of  exten- 
sive unregulated  powers.  These  potential  dangers  have 
played  no  insignificant  part  in  inducing  state  courts  in 
various  home-rule  states  to  limit  the  extent  of  powers 
apparently  intended  to  be  conferred  upon  cities  by  the 
home-rule  constitutional  provisions. 

If  then  all  communities  with  more  than  two  or  three 
hundred  inhabitants  are  to  be  supplied  with  more  or  less 
extensive  machinery  of  local  government,  is  there  any 
need  for  other  units  of  local  government  ?  Do  the  strictly 
rural  portions  of  the  states  need  any  machinery  for  the 
satisfaction  of  local  governmental  needs?  In  other 
words  are  there  in  these  rural  areas  any  local  needs  as 
distinguished  from  the  needs  that  are  or  can  be  satis- 
fied by  the  central  government  ?  In  order  to  answer  these 
questions  let  us  refer  again  briefly  to  the  activities  which 
are  as  a  matter  of  fact  undertaken  by  the  American 
counties. 

The  County. —  The  judicial  functions  of  the  county, 
which  are  the  most  universal  and  important  of  the  func- 
tions now  performed  by  counties,  are,  as  has  been  seen, 
in  no  proper  sense  local  functions.  They  are  clearly  func- 
tions of  state  concern,  and  while  the  satisfactory  adminis- 
tration of  justice  requires  sufficiently  numerous  judicial 
districts  so  that  access  to  the  courts  of  law  will  be  easy 
to  all  citizens,  there  is  no  necessary  reason  why  the  county 


466  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

should  be  the  district  chosen.  As  a  matter  of  fact  in 
many  states  several  counties  are  grouped  into  judicial 
districts  for  the  lowest  courts  of  general  procedure,  while 
in  a  number  of  instances  there  may  be  more  than  one  ju- 
dicial district  within  a  single  county.  Furthermore, 
whether  counties  as  now  constituted  are  satisfactory 
judicial  districts  or  not  they  are  not  properly  units  of  local 
self-government  for  this  purpose,  since  the  judicial  func- 
tion is  not  a  function  of  local  government.  Hence,  as 
has  already  been  pointed  out,  judicial  officers  should  not 
be  locally  elected  at  all.  In  England  the  county  courts, 
so-called,  have  no  jurisdictional  connection  with  the  ad- 
ministrative counties,  and  in  France  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  tribunals  of  first  instance  extends  over  the  arrondisse- 
ments,  which  are  not  local  government  corporations  at 
all.  In  neither  of  these  countries,  furthermore,  are  the 
officers  of  the  inferior  courts  chosen  by  popular  election. 
The  need  of  judicial  districts  in  the  states,  therefore,  has 
no  necessary  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  advisability 
of  continuing  the  counties  as  units  of  local  government. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  matter  of  police  protection  in 
the  rural  districts.  The  American  county  is  in  no  sense 
a  natural  unit  for  the  preservation  of  peace,  such  as  is 
the  urban  community.  Police  protection  in  the  strictly 
rural  areas  is  a  state-wide,  not  a  local  problem.  In  a 
large  state  there  will  no  doubt  be  a  need  for  constabulary 
or  police  districts,  but  such  districts  need  have  no  rela- 
tion to  present  county  lines  nor  is  there  any  proper  basis 
for  any  sort  of  local  selection  of  the  officials  in  charge 
of  such  districts.  A  state  police  or  constabulary  to  patrol 
the  rural  districts,  to  be  efficient,  must  be  directly  under 
the  control  and  direction  of  a  state  officer. 

Counties  are  now  almost  universally  election  districts 
for  state  legislators.     But  they  are  frequently  grouped 


CONCLUSION  467 

for  that  purpose,  especially  in  the  election  of  members 
of  the  state  senate,  and  are  grouped  in  still  other  combina- 
tions for  the  constitution  of  congressional  districts.  In 
this  respect  also  they  are,  of  course,  in  no  sense  local 
government  units. 

Another  important  activity  of  American  counties  which 
is  a  function  of  state  administration  is  the  assessment  and 
collection  of  state  taxes.  For  this  purpose  also,  the 
county  constitutes  no  natural  unit,  and  while  the  larger 
states  would  undoubtedly  need  revenue  districts  for  the 
administration  of  state  taxes,  it  is  by  no  means  clear  that 
present  county  lines  constitute  the  most  natural  or  most 
convenient  districts  for  that  purpose. 

The  same  considerations  apply  to  the  other  county  ac- 
tivities which  may  be  grouped  under  the  head  of  county 
functions  of  state  administration,  such  as  militia  organiza- 
tion and  the  recording  of  deeds  and  other  instruments. 
The  county  as  we  have  it,  is  neither  a  natural  nor,  in 
many  cases,  a  convenient  area  for  these  purposes.  In 
all  of  the  above  mentioned  respects  the  county  is  a  dis- 
trict of  state  administration  and  not  necessarily  the  most 
suitable  district  for  such  purposes. 

What  now  of  the  so-called  functions  of  local  adminis- 
tration, most  of  which  became  of  real  importance  long 
after  the  original  establishment  of  counties  for  judicial, 
election,  recording,  and  militia  purposes  ? 

Foremost  among  such  activities  ranks,  as  will  be  re- 
called, education.  Is  the  county,  like  the  city,  a  natural 
area  for  educational  administration?  That  is,  if  the 
county  were  not  already  in  existence,  would  any  such 
area  be  created  for  purposes  of  educational  administra- 
tion ?  It  would  seem  not,  for  county  lines  are  never  con- 
sciously established  with  any  reference  to  the  number  of 
school  children  contained  within  them  or  to  the  accessibil- 


468  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

ity  of  all  parts  of  the  county  to  any  central  institutions. 
As  has  been  seen,  in  practically  the  whole  of  the  United 
States  the  educational  needs  of  the  rural  areas  have  been 
met,  so  far  as  they  have  been  met,  by  the  creation  of 
special  school  districts,  much  smaller  than  the  county  and 
frequently  wholly  unrelated  thereto.  The  weakness  of 
these  petty  districts  has  already  been  pointed  out  and 
the  need  for  larger  areas  of  educational  administration 
emphasized.  In  a  number  of  states  the  county  has  been 
adopted  as  the  most  suitable  existing  district  for  more 
centralized  administration.  But  it  is  by  no  means  clear 
that  any  such  district  as  the  county  would  be  selected 
if  it  were  not  already  in  existence.  If  the  urban  com- 
munities take  care  of  their  own  elementary  school  needs, 
and  in  all  but  the  smallest  of  them  also  of  their  secondary 
school  needs,  the  strictly  rural  areas  must  be  provided, 
of  course,  with  proper  facilities  also.  But  the  creation 
of  proper  elementary  school  districts  and  their  correlation 
with  the  municipal  educational  facilities  is  a  matter  which 
could  be  handled  very  much  more  satisfactorily  by  the 
state  educational  authorities  with  reference  wholly  to  the 
educational  needs  to  be  served  and  without  regard  to  the 
existence  of  county  divisions,  which  so  far  as  this  ques- 
tion is  concerned  are  certainly  purely  arbitrary  geo- 
graphical divisions.  A  scientific  division  of  the  rural 
areas  of  the  state  into  educational  districts  both  for  direct 
administration  and  for  state  supervision  would  unques- 
tionably bear  no  relation  to  present  county  lines  if  these 
were  not  long  established  governmental  boundaries. 
Similar  considerations  apply,  of  course,  to  other  educa- 
tional agencies,  such  as  public  libraries. 

Highways  and  bridges  are  another  of  the  so-called  local 
concerns  of  counties.  But  counties  are  just  as  little 
natural  or  convenient  highway  districts  as  they  are  educa- 


CONCLUSION  469 

tional  districts,  a  fact  emphasized  by  the  almost  universal 
creation  of  smaller  highway  or  road  districts  within  the 
counties.  The  clear  tendency  in  the  last  years,  further- 
more, is  towards  an  increasing  participation  by  the  state 
government  in  the  construction  and  administration  of  the 
main  highways.  It  may  be  that  special  road  districts 
are  desirable  for  the  improvement  and  upkeep  of  second- 
ary roads,  but  it  is  clear  that  the  county  as  at  present 
constituted  is  not  necessarily  the  logical  agency  for  such 
administration. 

Poor  relief  and  the  conduct  of  charitable  institutions 
generally  was  another  of  the  early  functions  of  the  Amer- 
ican county  which  is  still  to  a  considerable  extent  in- 
trusted to  this  unit  of  local  government.  But,  as  was 
pointed  out  in  an  earlier  chapter,  the  problems  of  modern 
charity  administration  have  far  outgrown  the  capacity  of 
the  average  county,  and  the  state  is  cutting  more  and  more 
and  more  into  this  field,  so  far  as  institutional  care  is 
concerned.  Furthermore  the  cities  tend  to  be  saddled 
with  an  ever  increasing  share  of  the  outdoor  relief,  as  the 
poor  tend  to  drift  into  the  cities  during  the  winter,  either 
because  the  opportunities  for  finding  employment  are 
greater  there  or  because  the  opportunities  for  getting 
alms  are  better.  The  county,  therefore,  does  not  in  fact 
function  well  in  the  field  of  charities  nor  is  it  naturally 
adapted  to  that  function. 

One  of  the  more  recent  of  the  activities  of  counties  is 
in  the  field  of  public-health  administration.  But  here 
again,  the  county  as  compared  with  the  compact  urban 
communities  is  not  a  natural  unit  for  health  administra- 
tion. The  problems  of  rural  health  administration  are 
in  no  sense  affected  by  artificial  county  lines.  On  the  con- 
trary they  are  much  more  state-wide  than  local  in  their 
scope,  granted  that  each  urban  community,  no  matter 


470  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

how  small,  is  charged  with  caring  for  the  health  prob- 
lems of  its  inhabitants.  Rural  health  administration, 
like  rural  police  protection,  is,  therefore,  in  its  nature, 
more  adapted  to  central  administration,  and  the  health 
districts  which  it  may  be  necessary  to  create  for  con- 
venient administration  have  no  necessary  connection  with 
county  boundaries  as  at  present  constituted. 

It  seems,  therefore,  that  the  American  county  is  neither 
a  natural  unit  for  the  administration  of  state  affairs,  nor 
does  it  constitute  a  natural  division  for  the  conduct  of 
local  affairs.  The  conclusion  would  seem  to  follow  that 
while  all  compact  settlements  with  more  than  two  or  three 
hundred  inhabitants  are  natural  and  proper  units  for 
local  government  organization,  the  strictly  rural  popula- 
tion can  have  its  administrative  governmental  needs  more 
effectively  filled  by  means  of  direct  state  administration. 
For,  if  it  is  true  that  the  county  is  ill  adapted  to  the  per- 
formance of  the  functions  entrusted  to  it  in  this  direction, 
even  more  true  is  it,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out,  that 
the  non-urban  subdivisions  of  the  county,  such  as  the 
townships  in  the  Middle  Western  states,  are  ineffective 
areas  of  local  government. 

It  is  safe  to  assume,  however,  that  the  abolition  of  the 
county  as  an  area  of  local  self-government,  though  indi- 
cated as  the  most  effective  remedy  for  the  weaknesses  of 
the  present  system  of  local  government  in  this  country,  is 
too  radical  a  proposal  to  present  possibilities  as  a  practi- 
cal program  of  reform,  at  least  in  the  near  future.  It  is 
necessary,  therefore,  to  indicate  briefly  how  improvements 
may  be  hoped  for  along  more  conservative  lines.  Here 
we  are  confronted  with  an  apparent  paradox,  in  that 
while  it  has  been  contended  that  the  county  is  not  well 
adapted  to  performing  the  functions  it  is^now  charged 
with,  it  seems  to  be  true  that  if  the  county  is  to  remain 


CONCLUSION  471 

as  a  unit  of  local  self-government,  progress  must  lie 
in  the  direction  of  conferring  larger  powers  on  the  county 
than. it  now  enjoys.  The  explanation  of  this  apparent 
contradiction  is,  however,  simple.  As  at  present  con- 
stituted, the  county,  except  in  connection  with  its  police 
and  judicial  functions,  which  are  not  properly  functions 
of  local  self-government  at  all,  fails  to  arouse  the  inter- 
est of  its  citizens  because  of  its  apparent  insignificance. 
Not  only  will  competent  persons  not  be  attracted  to 
county  offices,  but  the  rank  and  file  of  the  voters  will  not 
even  go  to  the  polls  where  merely  county  officers  are  in 
question.  If,  however,  the  governmental  machinery  of 
the  county  is  simplified  and  at  the  same  time  the  functions 
of  the  county  are  enlarged,  it  is  possible  that  a  com- 
munity consciousness  may  be  developed  in  counties  as  it 
has  been  developed  in  a  large  number  of  cities  and  the 
county  electorate  will  be  awakened  to  the  need  of  com- 
petent officials,  while  the  increased  importance  of  the 
county  offices  will  attract  able  candidates.  If  the  Ameri- 
can county  could  be  developed  into  as  important  a  govern- 
mental unit  as  the  English  county  or  the  French  depart- 
ment, it  is  possible  that  it  would  enlist  a  corresponding 
public  interest.  It  must  not  be  forgotten,  however,  that 
in  area,  wealth,  and  density  of  population  the  correspond- 
ing units  of  rural  local  government  in  England  and 
France  are  far  ahead  of  the  average  American  county. 
Furthermore,  the  English  county  is  more  or  less  a  tradi- 
tional and  historical  unit,  and  even  the  French  depart- 
ment, though  originally  an  intentionally  arbitrary  divi- 
sion, has  more  than  a  century  of  vigorous  governmental 
activity  behind  it.  Consequently  the  American  county, 
which,  except  in  a  few  of  the  older  states  of  the  Union 
has  not  developed  a  local  patriotism  and  pride  to  any 
marked  extent,  labors  under  very  distinct  handicaps  as 


472  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

compared  with  the  corresponding  French  and  English 
areas. 

If,  then,  the  most  promising  line  of  development  for 
the  American  county  seems  to  be  in  the  direction  of  an 
increased  importance,  it  is  essential  that  such  develop- 
ment be  accompanied  by  a  corresponding  efficiency  in 
administrative  machinery.  Popular  control  of  the  elec- 
tive officials,  assisted  by  the  application  of  the  short-bal- 
lot principle,  and  such  instruments  of  control  as  the  in- 
itiative, referendum,  and  recall,  and  non-partisan  ballots; 
the  application  of  the  merit  system  for  the  civil  service  of 
the  county;  scientific  accounting,  purchasing,  and  budget 
procedure;  and  an  adequate  measure  of  state  administra- 
tive control,  may  serve  to  bring  such  counties  as  are 
populous  enough  to  carry  on  the  necessary  governmental 
operations  up  to  the  level  of  the  best  of  our  city  adminis- 
trations. The  less  populous  counties,  especially  those 
where  the  population  per  square  mile  is  small,  would 
seem  clearly  to  be  suited  rather  for  districts  of  state 
administration  than  for  organization  as  local  government 
corporations. 

There  would  seem  to  be  no  justification  for  smaller 
areas  of  local  government  than  the  county,  except  for  the 
urban  communities.  These  should  be  entrusted  with  the 
satisfaction  of  their  own  community  needs  and  in  the 
case  of  the  more  sizeable  ones  at  least,  say  those  from  ten 
or  fifteen  thousand  inhabitants  up,  be  wholly  distinct  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  county.  In  case  special  local  im- 
provement districts  seem  desirable  within  the  limits  of 
a  county,  these  should  not  be  constituted  separate  local 
corporations  as  is  now  commonly  done,  but  they  should 
be  administered  as  special  assessment  districts  by  the 
county  government,  as  is  now  done  for  paving  and  other 
improvements  within  cities.     If  public  undertakings  re- 


CONCLUSION  473 

quire  the  cooperation  of  two  or  more  counties,  provision 
should  be  made  for  the  joint  administration  of  such  un- 
dertakings by  the  counties  concerned  with  participation 
by  representatives  of  the  state  government  to  insure  har- 
monious action. 

In  some  such  way  as  this  the  first  steps  may  be  taken 
toward  a  scientific  solution  of  the  problems  of  local  rural 
government  in  this  country,  which  have  so  far  all  but 
escaped  the  consideration  of  thoughtful  students  of  gov- 
ernmental problems.  The  most  promising  lines  of  de- 
velopment in  the  field  of  city  government  have  been  indi- 
cated with  sufficient  emphasis  and  are  attracting  suf- 
ficient attention  so  that  continued  advance  in  that  field 
may  be  confidently  expected.  With  the  satisfactory 
working  out  of  the  problem  of  proper  city  and  county 
relations  one  of  the  remaining  difficulties  will  be  elim- 
inated in  that  field.  The  new  problems  that  are  con- 
tinually arising  in  connection  with  city  government,  im- 
portant and  difficult  as  they  are,  seem  to  call  for  no  such 
fundamental  readjustment  as  is  indicated  for  rural  gov- 
ernment. In  the  one  case  as  in  the  other,  however,  more 
active  and  sustained  citizen  interest,  and  more  careful  and 
accurate  study  and  analysis  are  conditions  precedent  not 
only  to  making  further  advance,  but  even  for  retaining 
the  ground  that  has  already  been  won. 


INDEX 


Accounting,  municipal,  422;  in 
county  administration,  248- 

Administration  of  state  affairs 
by  county,  judicial,  197-201 ; 
elections,  201-3;  assessment 
and  collection  of  taxes,  203; 
recording   of   deeds,   205-7; 
expenditures   in,   206;   mili- 
tary, 204 
Administrative       departments, 
municipal,  appointment  and 
removal,  337-9;  term  of  of- 
fice, 339;  salaries,  339;  com- 
position. 339 
Akron,     O.,     charter     of,     457 
Alabama,   early  local  govern- 
ment in,  103 
Alameda  County  and  Oakland, 
Cal.,   county-city   consolida- 
tion in,  444-6 
Aldermen.    See  Council,  City 
Arkansas,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  105 
Arrondissement,  51 
Assessments,  special,  in  coun- 
ties, 239;  in  cities,  417 
Assessor,  county,   161-5 
Attorney,  county,  144-51 
Auditor,  county,  168-70 


Baltimore,  bicameral  council 
in,  92 ;  county-city  consoli- 
dation in,  443 

Bicameral  council,  in  Balti- 
more,  92;    in    Philadelphia, 


92;  in  Boston,  97;  in  Pitts- 
burgh, 97 ;  in  New  York,  97 ; 
in  American  cities,  330 

Boroughs,  in  England,  5;  in 
colonial  local  government, 
68 ;  in  Virginia  Colony,  80-2 

Boston,  county-city  consolida- 
tion, 442;  charter  of   1910, 

454-6 
Budget,  in  county  administra- 
tion, 248-51 ;  in  cities,  327- 
329 


California,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  107;  county  char- 
ters in,  187 

Central  control,  over  counties, 
113,  116;  in  education,  212; 
in  county  indebtedness, 
244-6 ;  in  appointing  city  of- 
ficials, 337;  over  municipal 
functions,  360-5,  499;  and 
public  health,  390;  necessity 
for  in  county  functions,  465- 
71 ;  in  larger  cities,  464 ;  and 
highways,  468.  See  also 
State  control 

Central  control  in  England, 
early  developments,  13;  de- 
partments for,  29-35 ;  in  lo- 
cal indebtedness,  247 

Central  control  in  France,  up 
to  1789,  39;  absence  of  to 
1795,  40;  in  communes,  57 

Charities,  hospitals,  and  cor- 
rections,   expenditures    for, 


475 


476 


INDEX 


by  counties,  220-5  '■>  not 
adapted  to  county  adminis- 
tration, 224.  Sec  also  Poor 
relief 

Charters,  city,  general,  305-7; 
special,  304;  classified,  307; 
home  rule,  308-10;  optional, 
310 

Charters,  county,  in  California 
and  Maryland,  187 

Chicago,  confusion  in  local 
governments  in,  437-9 ; 
county-city  consolidation  in, 

,437-9 

Cincinnati,  county-city  consol- 
idation in,  441 

Cities,  general  characteristics, 
300-4;  development,  301-3; 
organization,  304-1 1 ;  legis- 
lative control  over,  360-5; 
liability  of,  363-9;  relation 
to  counties,  422-4 

City  manager  plan,  history  and 
development,  347-50 ;  ad- 
vantages of,  351 

City  organization,  321-57; 
mayor-council  type,  323-41 ; 
commission  plan,  341-7 ;  city 
manager  plan,  347-52 

City  planning,  412-4 

Clerk,  county,  170;  of  county 
court,,  142-4 

Cleveland,  county-city  consoli- 
dation,    440;     charter      of, 

456 

Commission  government,  his- 
tory and  development,  342- 
4 ;  merits,  344 ;  and  city  man- 
ager plan,  345 ;  weakness, 
346 ;  in  larger  cities,  347 

Commission  manager  plan. 
See  City  manager  plan 

Commissioner  plan  in  county 
government,  102 


Community  buildings  as  me- 
morials, 230 

Consolidation  of  county  and 
city,  437-49 

Constitutions,  State,  local  gov- 
ernment provisions  in,  112, 
116 

Cook  County,  111.,  multiplica- 
tion of  local  governments 
in,  282 

Coroner,  157-60 

Council,  in  France,  45 

Council,  city,  size,  331 ;  selec- 
tion, 331-2;  salaries,  333; 
organization  and  meetings, 
334;  powers  and  duties, 
334-^6 

Councils,  bicameral  and  uni- 
cameral, 330 

Counties  (U.  S.)  number,  120; 
size,  121;  population,  122; 
creation  and  abolition,  124; 
provisions  relating  to  coun- 
ties in  state  constitutions, 
128-30 

County,  in  Virginia  Colony, 
77-80;  development  to  1850, 
95-110;  general  features  of 
administration  of,  127;  legal 
nature  of,  186;  rights  and 
powers,  186-91 ;  as  a  quasi- 
corporation,  188;  abolition 
of,  470;  increase  of  powers 
of,  470-2;  need  for  more 
efficient  administrative  ma- 
chinery in,  472 

County,  English,  organization, 
14-29 

County  boards,  types  of, 
130-4;  powers  of,  134-9 

County-city  consolidation,  437- 
48 

County  district-commissioner 
system,   102 


INDEX 


477 


County  employees,  182-4 
County  functions,  judicial, 
197;  in  state  elections, 
201-3  '>  assessment  and  col- 
lection of  taxes,  203;  mili- 
tary administration,  204;  re- 
cording of  deeds,  205 ;  ex- 
penditures for,  206;  local 
administration  of,  207-9; 
education,  209-14;  libraries, 
214-7;  highways,  217-20; 
charities  and  corrections, 
220-5 ;  sanitation  and  pub- 
lic health,  225-8;  recreation, 
228-30 ;  public-service  en- 
terprises, 231 ;  finance,  232- 
51 ;  budget,  248-51 ;  sum- 
mary, 251-4;  central  con- 
trol in,  465-72 ;  those  belong- 
ing to  state  administration, 
465-70 

County  government,  120-185 
(Chapter  III)  ;  reforms  in, 
117;  constitutional  limita- 
tions on,  190-4;  agencies 
promoting  reforms  in,  449- 
52;  conclusions,  465-73 

County  officers,  130-84 

County  organization,  in  South- 
ern states,  284-8;  in  West- 
ern States,  288-90 

County  precinct  system,  in  Illi- 
nois, 100 

County  subdivisions,  284-90 ; 
semi-urban,  290-7 

County  township  system,  in 
Middle   West,    100 

Court  of  General  Sessions 
(England),  75 

Courts,   county,    197-200 

Courts,  municipal,  develop- 
ment, 353;  present  form, 
354-7;  weakness  of  system, 
354;  reforms  in,  356 


Dayton,  city  manager  plan  in, 
348 

Decentralization,  in  France, 
60 

Delaware  Colony,  local  gov- 
ernment in,  89 

Denver,  county-city  consolida- 
tion in,  446 

Detroit,  county-city  consolida- 
tion in,  439;  charter  of,  457 

Drainage  districts,  in  town- 
ship functions,  281 


Education,  expenditures  for 
by  counties,  209-14;  not  a 
county  function,  467;  pub- 
lic, in  American  cities, 
391-9;  officers,  in  counties, 
174-8 

Education,  Board  of,  in  Eng- 
land, established,  13 

Elections,  State,  county  func- 
tions in,  201-3 

Elective  principle  in  choosing 
county  officials,  96-1 11 

Electorate,  city,  qualifications 
of,  311;  powers  of,  31 1-4 

England,  local  government  in, 
origin  and  development,  4; 
boroughs  in,  5 ;  hundreds  in, 
6;  parish  in,  8;  Act  of  1832, 
II;  Act  of  1834,  II;  Munic- 
ipal Corporations  Act,  1835, 
1 1 ;  Municipal  Corporations 
Consolidation  Act,  1882,  12; 
changes  in,  12;  Local  Gov- 
ernment Act,  1888,  12; 
Act  of  1871,  13;  General 
Board  of  Health,  13 ;  Local 
Government  Act,  1894,  13; 
county  in,  14;  poor  law 
unions,  19;  county  districts, 
21 ;  summary,  35-7,  62-5 


478 


INDEX 


Escheats,   as  county   revenue, 
242 


Finance,  county,  per  capita  ex- 
penditures, 195-7;  revenues, 
233-43;  taxes,  234-6;  earn- 
ings of  general  departments, 
236;  subventions  and  grants, 
237-9 ;  special  assessments, 
239;  liquor  licenses,  240-2; 
poll  taxes,  241 ;  interest  and 
rents,  241 ;  non-revenue  re- 
ceipts, 243-8;  fines,  etc., 
242 ;  miscellaneous  revenue 
receipts,  244;  table,  252-4 

Finance,  municipal,  property 
tax,  415;  public  service  en- 
terprises, 416-8;  business 
and  non-business  license 
taxes,  418 

Fines,  as  county  revenue,  242 

Forfeits,  as  county  revenue, 
242 

France,  central  administrative 
departments  of,  59 

France,  local  government  in, 
origin  and  development,  37; 
department  in,  44;  arrondis- 
sements,  51;  communes,  52; 
cantons,  52 ;  central  control 
in,  39,  40,  57;  present  char- 
acteristics, 44-60 

Fire  departments,  organiza- 
tion and  administration  of, 

38i 

Florida,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  103 

Food  supply,  as  a  city  function, 

384-7 


Galveston,  origin  of  commis- 
sion government  in,   104 


Hare  System  of  proportional 
representation,  317 

Health,  Ministry  of,  estab- 
lished, 1919,  13;  note,  18 

Health,  General  Board  of,  cre- 
ated, 13 

Health,  public,  as  a  municipal 
function,  383-91 ;  education 
for,  388-91 ;  officers,  county, 
178-81 

Highways,  expenditures  for 
by  counties,  217-20;  as  a 
municipal  function,  403-5 ; 
not  a  county  function,  468 

Home  rule,  county,  in  Califor- 
nia, 117,  426;  in  Maryland, 
428;    further   developments, 

430-4 

Home  rule,  municipal,  begin- 
nings, 114;  history,  309; 
constitutional  provisions  re- 
lating to,  362;  developments 
in,  452;  charters,  308-10 

Hospitals,  county,  225 

Housing,  and  public  health, 
388 

Hundred,  in  England,  6 ;  in  co- 
lonial local  government, 
67 

Illinois,  early  local  government) 
in,  100 

Incorporation  of  towns  and 
villages,  292-4 

Indebtedness,  county,  243-8; 
limited  in  state  constitutions, 
244 

Indebtedness,  municipal,  420-2 

Indiana,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  100 

Initiative  and  referendum,  in 
municipal  government,  319- 


INDEX 


479 


Interest,    as    county    revenue, 

241 
Iowa,  early  local  government 

in,  105 


Jails,  county,  200 

Judges,  county,  139-42 

Justices  of  the  Peace,  in  co- 
lonial local  government,  68 ; 
in  present  local  government, 
160 


Kansas,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  112 

Kansas  City,  county-city  con- 
solidation in,  442 


Libraries,  county,  214-7;  PUD" 
lie,  397-9 

Liquor  licenses,  as  county  rev- 
enue, 240-2 

Local  government,  definition, 
1 

Local  government,  in  England. 
See  England,  local  govern- 
ment in 

Local  government,  in  France. 
See  France,  local  govern- 
ment in 

Local  government,  in  United 
States,  colonial  period,  66- 
90 ;  in  early  New  England, 
72-6;  in  Virginia  Colony, 
76-82;  in  middle  colonies, 
82-90;  from  the  Revolution 
to  1800,  90-5 ;  in  the  South, 
93-5 ;  in  the  Northwest  Ter- 
ritory, 93-103;  from  1800- 
1850,  95-1  n ;  in  the  old 
states,  95-8 ;  in  Southern 
states,  103-6;  in  the  South- 


west, 106;  in  tihe  new  terri- 
tories, 107-9;  from  1850  to 
1900,  1 1 1-6;  from  1900  to 
present  time,  116-9 

Local  Government  Board, 
English,  created,  13;  dis- 
continued, 13 

Los  Angeles,  county-city  con- 
solidation in,  444 

Louisiana,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  104 


Maryland,  county  charters  in, 
187 

Massachusetts,  early  local  gov- 
ernment in,  72-6 

Mayor,  in  France,  57 

Mayor,  in  United  States,  in 
Revolutionary  period,  97; 
growth  of  administrative 
powers  of,  115;  selection  of, 
324 ;  term  of  office,  325 ;  sal- 
ary, 326 ;  powers  and  duties, 
326-30 

Mayor-council  plan,  origin  and 
development,  324-30 

Michigan,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  102 

Minnesota,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  108 

Mississippi,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  103 

Missouri,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  104 

Mothers'  pensions,  in  counties, 
225 

Municipal  functions,  powers, 
358-61 ;  central  control  in, 
361-6,  419;  developments  in, 
370-5 ;  public  safety,  375- 
83;  public  health,  383-91; 
food  supply,  383-7 ;  waste 
disposal,      387;      education, 


480 


INDEX 


391-9;  libraries,  397-9;  so- 
cial welfare,  399-402;  poor 
relief,  399-401 ;  recreation, 
401;  public  works,  402-8; 
sewerage  systems,  407 ;  pub- 
lic utilities,  408-12;  city 
planning,  412-4;  power  to 
borrow,  420-2 

Municipal  government  in 
United  States,  developments 
to  1850,  in;  since  1850  to 
1900,  1 13-6;  since  1900,  118; 
conclusion,  462-5 

Municipal  ownership,  411 


Nebraska,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  112 

New  England  colonies,  local 
government  in,  72 

New  Jersey,  early  local  gov- 
ernment in,  88 

New  Mexico,  early  local  gov- 
ernment in,  108 

New  Orleans,  county-city  con- 
solidation in,  446 

New  York  City,  early  local 
government  in,  86;  local 
governments  in  at  the  pres- 
ent time,  437 

New  York  State,  early  local 
government  in,  83-6 

Non-partisan  ballot,  in  munici- 
pal elections,  314 

North  Dakota,  early  local  gov- 
ernment in,  112 

North  West  Territory,  local 
government  in,  93,  99-103 


Ohio,  early  local  government 
in,  99 

Oregon,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  108 


Parish,  early  organization  in 
England,  8;  in  colonial  local 
government,  67;  in  Virginia 
Colony,  76;  in  Louisiana, 
104 

Pennsylvania,  early  local  gov- 
ernment in,  86-8 

Philadelphia,  early  government 
of,  88 ;  bicameral  council  in, 
92 ;  county-city  consolida- 
tion in,  439;  charter  of,  458 

Police  departments,  375-81 

Political  parties,  development 
of  in  county  government, 
96;  in  county  elections,  202; 
in  municipal  elections,  312 

Politics,  municipal,  beginnings, 
97;   and  the   spoils   system, 

"5 
Poll  taxes,  as  county  revenue, 

241 
Poor  officers,  county,  181 
Poor  relief,  in  counties,  181 ; 
unsatisfactory      administra- 
tion of,  221-3;  as  a  munic- 
ipal  function,  309-401 
Prefect,  in  France,  47 
Prefectoral  Council,  49-51 
Preferential  ballot,  314-7 
Proportional       representation, 

314-9 

Public-health  administration, 
as  a  county  function,  225- 
228;  469;  as  a  municipal 
function,  383-91 

Public-health  nurses,   181 

Public  utilities,  private  owner- 
ship of,  408-12;  municipal 
ownership  of,  411 

Public  safety,  as  a  municipal 
function,  375-83 

Public-service  enterprises,  ex- 
penditures for  by  counties, 
231 


INDEX 


481 


Public  works,  as  a  municipal 
function,  402-8 


Recall,  in  municipal  elections, 

3*3 
Recorder    of    Deeds,    county, 

I7I-3. 

Recreation,  expenditures  for 
by  counties,  228 ;  as  a  county 
function,  228-30;  as  a  mu- 
nicipal function,  401 

Referendum.  See  Initiative 
and  referendum 

Reforms,  in  French  local  gov- 
ernment, 60;  in  county  gov- 
ernment, 117,  449-52;  in  mu- 
nicipal government,  459 

Rents,  as  county  revenue,  241 


St.  Louis,  county-city  consoli- 
dation in,  441 ;  charter,  456 

San  Francisco,  county-city 
consolidation  in,  443 

School  administration,  as  a 
county  function,  209-14;  as 
a  township  function,  279- 
81 ;  as  a  municipal  function, 

392-7 

School  authorities,  in  New 
England  towns,  265-6 

School  boards,  county,  selec- 
tion and  duties  of,  177; 
weakness  of  system  of,  393 

Selectmen,  in  New  England 
towns,  263 

Sewerage  systems,  as  a  munic- 
ipal function,  407 

Sheriff,  in  early  England,  5; 
in  American  counties,  15 1-7 

Short  ballot,  in  municipal  elec- 
tions, 314 


South  Dakota,  early  local  gov- 
ernment in,  112 

Spoils  System  in  early  local 
government,  96;  in  the  Rev- 
olutionary period,  97 ;  in 
municipal    government,    115. 

State  affairs,  administration  of 
by  counties.  See  Adminis- 
tration of  state  affairs  by 
county 

Streets,  as  a  municipal  func- 
tion, 403-5 

Superintendent,  county,  174-7 

Supervisor  system,  102 

Surveyor,  county,  173 

State  aid  to  counties,  subven- 
tions and  grants,  237-9 

State  control,  over  counties, 
434-6 


Tammany  Hall,  203 

Tax  collectors,  county,  165 

Taxation,  municipal,  415-9 

Taxes,  county,  234-6 

Taxing  power  of  counties,  lim- 
itations on,  234 

Texas,  early  local  government 
in,  106 

Toledo,  charter  of,  457 

Town,  organization  in  Massa- 
chusetts Colony,  72-4;  in 
present  New  England,  255- 
68 

Town  meeting,  in  New  Eng- 
land, 258-62 ;  in  Central  and 
Middle  West  states,  274-7 

Town  officers,  in  New  Eng- 
land, selectmen,  263 ;  clerk, 
264;  treasurer  254;  school 
authorities  265 ;  miscellane- 
ous, 266 

Towns  and  villages,  as  semi- 


482 


INDEX 


urban  subdivisions  of  coun- 
ties, 291-7 

Township,  not  an  essential 
unit  of  government,  282-4 

Township  functions,  school  ad- 
ministration, 279-81 ;  drain- 
age and  levee  districts,  281 

Township  officers,  in  Central 
and  Middle  West  states, 
277-9 

Townships,  in  early  England, 
5;  in  Central  and  Middle 
West  states,  268-84;  classes 
of,  269;  rights  and  powers, 
272 

Treasurer,   county,    166-8 

Urban  concentration,  114,  118 


Utah,  early  local  government 
in,  108 


Villages,  as  semi-urban  sub- 
divisions of  counties,  291-7 

Virginia,  colonial  local  gov- 
ernment  in,  76-82 


Water  supply,  as  a  municipal 
function,  405-8 

Welfare,  social,  as  a  county 
function,  230;  as  a  munici- 
pal function,  399-402 

Wisconsin,  early  local  govern- 
ment in,  102 


(l) 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


i 


10m-9,'66(G5925s4) 


L  005  327  645  7 

331 
J23^ 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  786  525    6 


